This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Pipes Again -- a simple test case
- From: Houder <houder at xs4all dot nl>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 17:12:57 +0100
- Subject: Re: Pipes Again -- a simple test case
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <0aebd09993901f3ef3ff728d162952cd at xs4all dot nl> <568A32BE dot 4080101 at gmail dot com> <c7ebcc77c3ee94c4a81c48ebbdc81de9 at xs4all dot nl> <20160108151933 dot GI20447 at calimero dot vinschen dot de>
On 2016-01-08 16:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jan 4 10:24, Houder wrote:
On 2016-01-04 09:52, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>On 04/01/2016 09:03, Houder wrote:
>>I have been looking for an STC to show why cmp fails on Cygwin (and to
>>difference between Cygwin and Linux).
>>The STC below creates a pipe (pipe() is used), followed by calls to
>>stat() for both the read end and the write end of the pipe.
>>(I also tested with popen()/pclose(): same result)
Thanks for the STC. However, given how this stuff works internally,
I have no good solution off the top of my head. I played with various
ideas but to no avail. I add this to my TODO list, but I probably
won't have a quick solution :(
P.S: It would be really helpful if you could stick to the original
thread and simply use "reply-to" once a discussion has started.
It's very confusing having to connect the various threads.
Perhaps David B. can be helped by a Cygwin-specific patching to "cmp"?
... replacing the call to fstat() by a call to stat() ...
(as shown in https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2015-12/msg00348.html)
By the way, thank you for reporting back to "us" about this. I already
feared that a "general" solution would have to wait ... You have already
too much on your plate.
As a final point, I also tested FIFOs and (unix domain) sockets.
FIFOs pass the test, sockets do not.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple