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 From: Chris Faylor Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 01:12:21 -0400 To: "'cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com'" Subject: Re: How is textmode/binmode determined in Cygwin 1.1.0 net releas e for pipes? Message-ID: <20000428011221.A1537@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cgf AT cygnus DOT com, "'cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com'" References: <1DB8BA4BAC88D3118B2300508B5A552C0C8CDC AT mail DOT fitlinxx DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.12i In-Reply-To: <1DB8BA4BAC88D3118B2300508B5A552C0C8CDC@mail.fitlinxx.com>; from db3l@fitlinxx.com on Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 12:40:08AM -0400 On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 12:40:08AM -0400, David Bolen wrote: >In terms of your observation, I should point out that the best way to handle >things is to find a reference (someone or something) that already has the >answer, and thus minimize the amount of work you have to do - laziness being >one of a developer's hallmarks. That's not the best way. Humans are fallible, as my test case pointed out. The net result was that, in the end, I was right, but I forgot to remove the setmode. If the setmode turned out to be a key point of this test, then this "expert" would have given you a wrong answer. So, you can ask me if binmode is the default and I can say either "yes" or "no". If I say "yes", I may be right. But if you have a properly written test case (which in this case took five minutes to write) you might actually have a tool which you can use to verify issues like this in the future. The basic problem is that B20.1 came out 16 months ago. There has been a lot of cygwin development since then. Most of it was done by me but I don't know now exactly how everything works. When I was going back through the ChangeLog to generate a list of things for DJ to send out in his net release announcement I was amazed by the amount of stuff that was done to Cygwin that I didn't remember. Anyway, DJ and Corinna and a couple of others can certainly figure this stuff out but I am frequently discouraged by the dearth of people willing to look into the cygwin source code or even check things out for themselves. I don't mean to be picking on you since you seem to "get it" and are willing to dig to figure out a problem. It just seems that the cygwin project suffers from the lack of a component that is more prevalent in other open source projects. I probably understand the reason for this -- cygwin requires a multi-disciplined understanding of things like the GNU configure system, Windows programming, c++, and the cygwin environment itself. Each of those items presents a hurdle to potential contributors. And, most people also aren't really interested in improving the cygwin tool, anyway. They just want a nice free UNIX environment or a free development environment or a free way to login to their system remotely. If this purported UNIX-emulation environment doesn't do what they want then that's just confusing or annoying. The perceived lack doesn't seem to cause anyone to want to roll up their shirt sleeves and dive in. I think that there is somehow a different mindset at work here than in many other open source projects. Or, maybe we just don't have the critical mass. Anyway, sorry for the rambling semi-rant. You have every right to ask a question here and expect a semi-informed response if someone knows, or thinks they know, the answer. I was just taking an opportunity to make an observation and I really should have made it clearer that I was not in any way put out by you making a simple query. Christopher Faylor Cygwin Something or Other Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat company -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com