Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:31:53 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: More pipe (and other) improvements in snapshot Message-ID: <20021215003152.GA3331@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <000601c2a3b1$54b3bec0$777b1f3e AT leper> <1325251921 DOT 20021214215345 AT huno DOT net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1325251921.20021214215345@huno.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 09:53:45PM +0100, thomas wrote: > >I've piped several GB for testing purposes (with cat | dd), and input >and output are always the same, so I've yet to encounter that *possible* >data loss. >And nice'd up pipes finally behave like they are supposed to: they are a >bit faster than their not nice'd up brothers, and not terribly slower >like in 1.3.17 :) It's interesting that for pipes to act "as they are supposed to" cygwin now has to create up to three additional handles to try to mimic the way UNIX does it. And, IMO, linux does it right. >Anyway, with the first snapshot cdrdao completely locks up my XP. Um, if your XP was completely locked up then there is something wrong with your XP. >I had no time to run some debugging on it, neither have i tried the new >snapshot yet. It is probably fixed there already. I'll try tomorrow >and report back. There is no reason to assume that there is anything int the snapshot that would fix this behavior since, AFAIK, it wasn't reported, and the basic principle remains unchanged, regardless. cgf -- 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/