Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2001/03/23/07:59:53
Hi!
Friday, 23 March, 2001 Robert Collins robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au wrote:
RC> For those interested in the "how" side, I'm planning on avoiding named
RC> pipes (due to the horror stories I've heard about win 9x).
RC> Instead I plan on using a manual reset named event object and a named
RC> mutex. The mutex will control access, and the event object will control
RC> syncronisation. (I.e if process 2 opens & tries to write, it will
RC> successfuly get the mutex, and then wait for the event object to be
RC> pulsed. It will then "write" the data. The recieving process will
RC> recieve the mutex when the first process completes the write. That then
RC> gets repeated.
RC> For data transfer, I was thinking of using shared named memory:anyone
RC> know of caveats for that on win9x?
1. it won't work with non-cygwin apps.
2. the biggest problem with fifo is that there can be several readers
and several writers. and i don't know how to implement the following
thing: when all writers die all readers should receive eof. and it
should work even if writers haven't had a chance to exit gracefully,
but was killed from taskmanager, for example. Similarly, when all
readers die, writers should unblock with EPIPE.
Egor. mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19
- Raw text -