X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references
	:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
	:mime-version; q=dns; s=default; b=fP2A1chrenZzWcq0fbHcGSjT5b7Ly
	esF5bdQq1aDc36SKhU0YreoxDyngqmwoQZvWa72tlwCHdhmWgXWWgxPw51wfGI0Q
	qJmh2AXr0HnljYVj4h+6U3iTvftCpJY8UOySh3MbKndfdg3dkgf6zOioeC0+DnDW
	bNSS4O3MmTztRA=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references
	:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
	:mime-version; s=default; bh=vZs0b8dXP5ubAiVkuvfHtswrdBw=; b=P3F
	6mZtplFakHcIFFoV1AIPsNf2NZ+aPu58GgEmdKtJSaXLM63H5eUcUN1xrbRT+DoD
	7aS59bBLXphf4oJcCv3z0icp7BcR6yWo+jSzeW0tq7aY41Nv2q//orSDhkFVhRWL
	ikFlHZVV2ZlfY+qcDK7YtMW54lY8X91amyUD2130=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,MIME_BASE64_BLANKS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
From:	Rich Eizenhoefer <riche AT microsoft DOT com>
To:	"cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	RE: From Microsoft: Windows 10 Console and Cygwin
Date:	Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:23:00 +0000
Message-ID:	<BN3PR03MB1430C0664FE9E4DBBCC4FD29B4BF0@BN3PR03MB1430.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References:	<BN3PR03MB1430B88AED4339821C7D95BEB4D50 AT BN3PR03MB1430 DOT namprd03 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com> <20150502133833 DOT GB12723 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <BN3PR03MB1430C0816A9D41BB051687A4B4D20 AT BN3PR03MB1430 DOT namprd03 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com> <1433098286892-118602 DOT post AT n5 DOT nabble DOT com> <20150601082456 DOT GG4308 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <BN3PR03MB14303BAD46376DED807CFA2CB4B60 AT BN3PR03MB1430 DOT namprd03 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com> <CAJ1KOAiG-VV2heqYSNSjwCb=s_pjxoxKaGY3SnDiy4E20yvOWw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <BN3PR03MB1430F49F8839B66558779F3AB4B50 AT BN3PR03MB1430 DOT namprd03 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com> <556E01FC DOT 6060004 AT redhat DOT com> <CAB2911B-10C9-409F-B0A4-A88C3C9EB0BD AT etr-usa DOT com> <20150608114924 DOT GA3005 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To:	<20150608114924.GA3005@calimero.vinschen.de>
authentication-results:	cygwin.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics:	1;BN3PR03MB1432;3:quyfKhqbGpGuEqM+OS20lzVHJKmz65Of2vMKD7GJ6XjjC5a5bUvNYtIr5y/2FiOkbknfTpm2Z03PZH9zV6utMWesfrDBRWCES1wtYQ12os2ooBLpYqIdaOqreUy/1OE7Ij5QpaLOwar8U4TX8cnh4w==;10:HrpA74jYBSqFqA2Hm3YC7Gx2qlrHe4ZuIkAd6f6YBtDXjH6MbByBqfk75QbmRqMbyCQgP2kDdRCOKVX8jQjNjSAYM4RxR/ZT5Vt/0Mjp6WM=;6:qR6jndwn1bV2DhoAkNDS7Tg0FIbp5jNrfK9VJjkneiIa+p/5/mdJRGdfIQyHFfDu
x-microsoft-antispam:	UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN3PR03MB1432;
x-o365ent-eop-header:	Message processed by - O365_ENT: Allow from ranges (Engineering ONLY)
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs:	<BN3PR03MB143258F3DD74B32EB38EF77FB4BF0 AT BN3PR03MB1432 DOT namprd03 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test:	UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test:	BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(601004)(2401001)(520003)(5005006)(3002001);SRVR:BN3PR03MB1432;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN3PR03MB1432;
x-forefront-prvs:	060166847D
x-forefront-antispam-report:	SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(51704005)(24454002)(479174004)(19580405001)(110136002)(107886002)(106116001)(87936001)(76576001)(189998001)(62966003)(54356999)(77156002)(2656002)(93886004)(5001960100002)(2501003)(99286002)(77096005)(2950100001)(2900100001)(2351001)(5002640100001)(122556002)(74316001)(40100003)(46102003)(92566002)(76176999)(450100001)(86362001)(33656002)(19580395003)(102836002)(50986999)(66066001)(86612001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;SRVR:BN3PR03MB1432;H:BN3PR03MB1430.namprd03.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;MLV:sfv;LANG:en;
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-OriginatorOrg:	microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime:	08 Jun 2015 17:23:00.4906 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader:	Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id:	72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped:	BN3PR03MB1432
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id t58HNGIh022149

We're hearing more and more need for something like this, not just a hidden console window but a proper bifurcation between a console server and client so to speak. I'll add the POSIX pty idea to our backlog for when we start reviewing the overall requests in this area.

--Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com] 
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 4:49 AM
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: Rich Eizenhoefer
Subject: Re: From Microsoft: Windows 10 Console and Cygwin

On Jun  2 14:49, Warren Young wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2015, at 1:20 PM, Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com> wrote:
> > 
> > On 06/02/2015 10:37 AM, Rich Eizenhoefer wrote:
> >> Can you provide more detail on changing isatty function to support Cygwin PTY's? I need to be able to support the request in our backlog.
> > 
> > As long as we are wishing, it would be awesome if Windows natively 
> > supported ptys as actual objects, instead of making cygwin have to 
> > emulate them on top of other objects.
> 
> In my ignorance of how ptys map to Windows console objects, I held off from asking for this when Mr. Eizenhoefer solicited ideas, but this is what I thought of at that time, too.
> 
> In other words, this notion of “virtual terminals” is already implemented multiple times, following a standard that specifies the expected semantics — POSIX — so why not just do that?
> 
> Why, in the end, can Windows *not* have ptys?

That's a good question. 

Basically Windows console handles are kind of one half of the equation.
They don't follow the expected semantics but they are what native Windows tools know and expect.

Opening up the other half of the equation, the server side, without forcing to start conhost, might be enough to allow emulating POSIX ptys.

But I agree, real ptys with POSIX semantics would be cool.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

- Raw text -