Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:08:45 +0100
From: thomas <tom AT huno DOT net>
Reply-To: thomas <tom AT huno DOT net>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <44125937.20021211150845@huno.net>
To: cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: pipe improvements in snapshot
In-Reply-To: <20021211041250.GA31215@redhat.com>
References: <20021211041250 DOT GA31215 AT redhat DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christopher Faylor <cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> wrote:

> Please check out the latest snapshot and report here if there are
> problems.  I haven't yet tried this on Windows 9x class systems so it's
> entirely possible that there is a problem there.

It seems to work great! I did a few tests and there was no delay anymore
whatsoever. I've just sent the dll to someone to try out on a 9x system.

One thing about the possible data loss: Is that true data loss, like
some bytes won't make it trough the pipe, or will that only result in a
delay because the bytes have to be send again?

I will do some more thourough tests and will report back.

Thanks so far!
thomas


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/