Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Message-ID: <03F4742D8225D21191EF00805FE62B990205E17D@AA-MSG-01> From: John Wiersba To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: RE: cat broken Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 12:59:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Phil: OK, I see what you're saying now. What I was talking about was a duplicate echo. Not the normal echoing of characters which you can turn on and off with stty, but a *second* copy of the line you just typed which is echoed immediately after pressing the ENTER key. cat > file this is a test. (ENTER pressed here) this is a test. please stop repeating what I say (ENTER pressed here) please stop repeating what I say ... cat is broken in the 5/23 release, fixed in the 1/16 and 6/10 releases (I don't know why). Regarding those "trace thingies": The problem is that I'm experimenting with different versions of the cygwin1.dll to see if I can find one which fixes some of the more serious bugs without introducing new bugs. For example, the 5/23 dll fixes the "find command broken across mounts" bug but breaks cat in the process. I guess that's what's meant by a "stable" release -- a release which introduces very few new bugs of its own while fixing a substantial number of the bugs in previous releases. If I'm experimenting with every version of the dll after 5/23, trying to find one which fixes the problems I'm experiencing, it's a real pain to have to unpack the inst archive, too. I was hoping someone could tell me: "The version released on, e.g. 6/10, fixes most of the reported bugs that have been fixed so far and ***has not been reported to have introduced any serious new bugs***". Then I could grab that version of the dll and the inst archive and spend the time to install them with reasonable confidence that I'll have a working system when I'm done ("working" means "with all the goodies which have worked in the past but without major new bugs"). -- John > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Edwards [mailto:pedwards AT jaj DOT com] > Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 12:48 PM > To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; John DOT Wiersba AT medstat DOT com > Subject: RE: cat broken > > > > > > > > Using the 5/23 cygwin1.dll, the following is broken: > > > > cat >file > > > > It echos the input typed from the terminal > > > > > > Uh, that's what is supposed to happen... unless you mean > that it ONLY > > > echos the input, and writes a zero-length file? > > > > No, "cat >file" should take input from stdin (the terminal) > and write it to > > file, which in fact is what happens with the 1/15 > cygwin1.dll. However, the > > 5/23 dll echos the input from terminal back to the terminal. > > Let me try again. On any and every Unix, > > $ cat > file > This is a test. > ^D > $ > > should echo to the screen as well as write to the file. You > will be hard > pressed to not get that stuff echoed on the screen. I'm > /hoping/ that your > problem is that cat is /only/ echoing to the screen and not > /also/ writing > a file. Check? > > > Now, the errors that you're seeing after replacing the DLL > (those freaky > trace thingies) are indeed due to a mismatch between a binary > and the DLL. > That's the only major problem with using the inst snapshots; > it's harder > to keep things in sync (e.g., backing out replacements, or > not getting a > new binary with a new DLL). How you as an end user manage > that is largely > a matter of taste -- copying directory structures and > updating a copy, or > reinstalling original binaries from a distribution, or just > living with > the nonfatal errors, etc, etc. > > > (If you reply to the list, please DON'T cc another copy to > me. Thanks!) > Phil > -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com