Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 19:18:02 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why?
Message-ID: <20110509231801.GA19097@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20110509161028 DOT GJ27739 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4DC86A3C DOT 6060605 AT towo DOT net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4DC86A3C.6060605@towo.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:27:08AM +0200, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>Am 09.05.2011 18:10, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
>>Chris and I are wondering how many people are using the Windows console
>>as local console window in CYGWIN=tty mode and why.
>>
>>Here's why we ask:
>>
>>We are both not sure why anybody would use it voluntarily, given that
>>it's I/O is extremly slow, compared to using a Windows console window
>>in the default CYGWIN=notty mode or, even better, mintty.  Actually, we
>>only keep the console tty mode up because it was "always there", 14
>>years or so.
>>
>>So, if you're using a console in tty mode, why are doing that?  Did you
>>ever notice that it's much slower?  Did you ever consider to switch to
>>mintty or any other terminal emulator instead?  If not, why?  Would
>>anybody really *miss* the CYGWIN=tty mode?  If so, why?  What does this
>>mode have which isn't covered by notty mode or another terminal
>>emulator?
>
>I don't use it but there is one difference that I actually reported
>years ago: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=513 and I
>mentioned it again in
>http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2009-q4/msg00144.html and
>http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2009-q4/msg00155.html - later I
>tried to debug again and saw that with CYGWIN=tty, one fhandler_console
>object drives console I/O whereas with CYGWIN=notty 3 objects are
>created (for stdin, stdout, stderr).  This is the reason for the cursor
>position response code getting lost because it is pushed into the wrong
>fhandler_console object.  I tried to patch it but it got all messed up
>so I didn't post anything then.

We will certainly be willing to fix problems as they occur.  I don't
think that erroneous cursor reporting is a show stopper.

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple