This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: General question on the status of named pipes
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 23:24:30 -0400
- Subject: Re: General question on the status of named pipes
- References: <CALEg2urgsV9EK9cgbawiDJdvYt4p5wQ8M5b50pvF19=hEitSrg@mail.gmail.com> <4EA5A683.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: cygwin 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
>> 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
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.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple