Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 20:39:35 -0500
From: alex <alex@zoosmart.us>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: a better socketpair
Message-ID: <20070309013935.GA11276@zoosmart.us>
References: <20070308223950.GK14344@cantrip.org> <20070308235215.GB7745@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20070309002047.GL14344@cantrip.org> <20070309003308.GA9357@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070309003308.GA9357@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

I found something about pipes in the rel notes for 1.5.20-1 at

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2006-07/msg00000.html

looks like they work.

I found a brief mention of socketpair at
http://cygwin.com/cygwin-api/std-misc.html#AEN107

and more here about sockets and select

http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/highlights.html#ov-hi-sockets

On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 07:33:08PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 04:20:47PM -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
> >Hi Christopher,
> >
> >Thank you for your quick reply.  I understand that this code might 
> >not ultimately be useful to cygwin.  It continues to work in my 
> >project, so I'm not put out.  
> >
> >I wonder, though, do you know if it might be useful to Mingw?
> >I.e., might it be worth offering to them, or do you know of a
> >reason why not to bother?
> >
> >As a side note, Google finds lots of complaints about pipes not being
> >usefully selectable for writing in cygwin.  Has that been fixed already?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/