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 sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <3A2EBA0C.97C41502@sattel.com> Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:13:32 -0800 From: Bruce Edge Organization: Sattel Global Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.15-4mdk i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin support Subject: Re: O_NONBLOCK serial I/O blocks on 95, OK on NT References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Town, Brad" wrote: > > Microsoft's overlapped I/O for serial ports is fully implemented, though > it's just different enough to drive you crazy. I've had times when serial > I/O code (straight Win32 API stuff) would work perfectly under NT/2000, but > would fail under Win9x because some parameters were considered invalid. I > wish I could remember the details. So do I :-) Does anyone know if anything changed WRT serial I/O on 98 or ME? I have to support _one_ of the crappy OSs. I was wondering if an upgrade would be worth it. Lastly, more data: When I'm hung up in the read(), my timer interrupt ISR stops getting called. Only thing it seems to respond to at this point is a Ctrl-C. -Bruce. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com