X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-101.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,USER_IN_WHITELIST X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1/wtM76IOSqjLAJBtLkvw5Y Resent-From: Christopher Faylor Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:40:45 -0400 Resent-Message-ID: <20120427144045 DOT GA13597 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> Resent-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:32:22 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Cygwin passes through null writes to other software when redirecting standard input/output (i.e. piping) Message-ID: <20120427143222.GA5625@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <020501cd23f2$20f07620$62d16260$@motionview3d.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:08:23AM +0100, cygwin-alanhowells.e4ward.com wrote: >Christopher Faylor says >> Nope, it won't always be that because I get what's expected. I built >> the C++ files using mingw g++. Although I actually expected the reader >> to honor the null byte, it did not. Perhaps you are using a different >> version of Windows than I am or a different runtime. > >But the point by James is that it is the VC++ runtimes (and .NET >runtimes) that think that a null write is EOF. Other runtimes may not >(e.g. mingw). I was reporting what I found with the tools I have at hand. My experience refutes the use of the word "always". The whole point of my mentioning "a different runtime" was to show that I understood that others' mileage varies. I wasn't saying that I don't believe what's being reported. >I agree with James that the runtimes are probably buggy BUT I also >agree that cygwin should be able to have a handle these scenarios. Your complete agreement with each other is not going to have much effect. Cygwin source code is not changed by voting. 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