Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:47:19 +0100 From: Jens Yllman Subject: Re: The implementation of popen(). To: David Whitten Cc: GNUWin32 Message-id: <38C6E687.8D361EAE@uniweb.se> Organization: Uniweb AB MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en References: <200003061632 DOT IAA06269 AT netcom DOT com> There may be many reasons why it is that much code in the cygwin implementation. And actually it is not much code in popen(). But it calls fork() and that calls ... and so on and on. I just wondered if someone here knew a way around the stupid implementation of popen() in windows. Jens Yllman David Whitten wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > I've a UNIX program that uses popen(). But when I try to use that with > > _popen() that is in Win32 I can not call a program that uses _popen(). > > But this works with popen() in Cygwin. I've looked at the code in > > Cygwin. And it as quite alot of code. So I just wonder if there is > > anybody here who know what is realy needed to get it to work. Why I > > don't use Cygwin for this project is because I link with a static > > library that does only work with MS-Visual C++. > > If it works in cygwin, I assume that all of the code is necessary. > Windows has some seriously limited code. > Why would the Cygwin developers want to add more code if they didn't > need to ? > > Dave -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Uniweb AB Phone: +46 8 626 42 00 P O Box 745 FAX: +46 8 626 42 01 S-191 27 SOLLENTUNA SWEDEN http://www.uniweb.se/ -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com