Date:	Tue, 14 Aug 2001 09:56:23 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
Message-Id:	<8011-Tue14Aug2001095623+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<10108131922.AA12804@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject:	Re: Windows 2000 io testing
References:	<10108131922 DOT AA12804 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:22:13 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> The reason I'm asking is that this may be relatively hard to fix.  If
> we fixed all the rest of the known issues other than devices, how much
> would break?  Should we fix everything else first and defer this?  Or
> work on devices and slow down getting the other items fixed?

It's hard to tell.  I'm afraid that if this breaks, the breakage might
be very painful.  If that's true, we will have to fix this anyway, and
the order doesn't matter, because we cannot afford putting out a
version that breaks some ports so hard.

But maybe it's time for reality check: could someone rebuild Less and
see whether it still works on W2K?  Or even don't rebuilt, just run
the binary from SimTel.NET.  In addition to the normal interactive
mode, I'd suggest to test something like "less < foo > bar", both from
the stock shell and from Bash.

Also, could people please grep the source distributions for strings
like "CON", "NUL", "PRN", "/dev/tty", "/dev/null", and see whether
more programs open/reopen one of these instead of using the
preconnected handles?

- Raw text -