O_NONBLOCK serial I/O blocks on 95, OK on NT

[Town, Brad]

I now remember that *my* errors were due to passing NULL for some values
that should be ignored.  Under NT/2000, that worked, but under 95, they'd
fail with ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER.  Even though the parameters should have
been ignored, I still had to provide a valid pointer.  Since Cygwin's serial
I/O works at all under Win9x, then that's almost certainly not the problem.

I wouldn't count on an upgrade doing much for this problem.

Bruce Edge [ mailto:bedge@sattel.com ] wrote:
> "Town, Brad" wrote:
> > 
> > Microsoft's overlapped I/O for serial ports is fully 
> implemented, though
> > it's just different enough to drive you crazy.  I've had 
> times when serial
> > I/O code (straight Win32 API stuff) would work perfectly 
> under NT/2000, but
> > would fail under Win9x because some parameters were 
> considered invalid.  I
> > wish I could remember the details.
> 
> So do I :-)
> 
> Does anyone know if anything changed WRT serial I/O on 98 or ME?
> I have to support _one_ of the crappy OSs. I was wondering if 
> an upgrade would
> be worth it.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com