This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why?

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
>I don't use it but there is one difference that I actually reported
>years ago: and I
>mentioned it again in
> and
> - 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.


Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]