This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why?
- From: Thomas Wolff <towo at towo dot net>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 00:27:08 +0200
- Subject: Re: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why?
- References: <20110509161028.GJ27739@calimero.vinschen.de>
- Reply-to: Thomas Wolff <towo at towo dot net>
Am 09.05.2011 18:10, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
Hi,I don't use it but there is one difference that I actually reported
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
and I mentioned it again in
- 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.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple