Mail Archives: cygwin/1998/02/04/23:57:56
On 04-Feb-1998, Andrew Innes <andrewi AT harlequin DOT co DOT uk> wrote:
> On 04 Feb 1998 17:07:50 -0800, Nils Goesche <ngo AT wossolit DOT teles DOT de> said:
> >You have to uncomment that fflush-line. But the usual shells
> >like command.com or 4nt don't need that line. This is somewhat
> >annoying. Can I at least force the shell somehow to flush
> >input/output buffers? Some other programs are just unusable
> >because of this behavior.
>
> This is a consequence of the design of Windows (well, that combined with
> the behaviour of the Microsoft C runtime library).
>
> Most DOS/Windows compilers make stdout unbuffered if isatty() returns
> true, and isatty() in turn calls GetFileType on the OS file handle - if
> the handle is a console handle, then isatty returns true.
>
> Emacs has to redirect stdin and stdout/stderr for subprocesses through
> pipes so it can communicate with them, but cannot hide the fact that
> the handles are pipe handles.
Does that mean that
- a proper pseudo-tty implementation (one for which isatty() would
return true) is not possible on Windows?
- a proper pseudo-tty implementation is possible, but cygwin32
doesn't have one yet?
- a proper pseudo-tty implementation is possible, and cygwin32
has one, but emacs doesn't use it?
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh AT cs DOT mu DOT oz DOT au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh AT 128 DOT 250 DOT 37 DOT 3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".
- Raw text -