Re: General question on the status of named pipes

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:55:15AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>On 10/24/2011 06:51 AM, Nathan Thern wrote:
>> I have several scripts that use named pipes for the purpose of
>> processing sound files. I use them on both linux and cygwin. After the
>> switch to cygwin1.7 I converted most of them to the use of tempfiles.
>> Nevertheless, when encountering old scripts in my archives or when
>> trying to create efficient new scripts I find myself wishing named
>> pipes still worked; they are one of the more powerful unix-ish
>> paradigms.
>>
>> What's the status/priority of getting named pipes to work in 1.7? And,
>> just for curiosity's sake, what was the fundamental change in 1.7 that
>> caused them to stop working? -- They worked great in 1.5.
>
>Actually, named pipes have _never_ worked, at least according to the 
>full set of POSIX rules.  It's just that some releases had code that 
>limped along better than in other releases for the particular use cases 
>you happened to throw at them.  cgf is working miracles to get it as far 
>along as he has, but it's a very tough job to emulate POSIX fifos on top 
>of windows.

No guarantees but the most recent snapshot should work better.  There is
still at least one glaring problem that I'm aware of but it may work
better than 1.7.9.

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