This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Reading Term::ReadKey support for ActiveState Perl and Cygwin
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Paul Dorman wrote:
> Yes, I've done some more research and experimentation and determined
> the lack of STDIN and STOUT in Cygwin makes it impossible to do what I
> would like with ActiveState Perl.
Huh? Cygwin does have STDIN and STDOUT -- they are just not bound to a
console, and ActivePerl doesn't like that.
> I don't mind Cygwin Perl at all, but here we must use the
> ActiveState implementation (by policy).
And what would the crucial difference be between an ActiveState
implementation's behavior and Cygwin's? I mean, can't you simply run
the Perl script using Cygwin's perl? Then you get the best of both
> Is this situation likely to improve in the future? Could a real
> terminal be created for Cygwin complete with STDIN and STDOUT? I
> imagine it's a pretty difficult thing to implement...
Most likely not -- Cygwin uses ptys (pipes, essentially) to simulate ttys
for processes that can't be bound to a Windows console, and there may be
real restrictions (e.g., Windows limitations) for not being able to
implement what you're asking for without breaking existing Cygwin
functionality. However, if it is really important to your company, you
can try looking into funding some research on this (either via a Cygwin
support contract with Red Hat, or via direct donations to a private
|\ _,,,---,,_ email@example.com | firstname.lastname@example.org
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' old name: Igor Pechtchanski
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html