setup will have to wait :[

Robert Collins robert.collins@itdomain.com.au
Sun Mar 25 14:08:00 GMT 2001


----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf@redhat.com>
To: <cygwin-developers@cygwin.com>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: setup will have to wait :[


> On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 07:57:59AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >> Cygwin doesn't implement named pipes.  Isn't a fifo == a named pipe
> >> anyway?
> >
> >Yes. I'm looking into the behaviour in more detail defore I cut code,
> >but yes. My planned implementation is a shared memory region that
lists
> >the named pipes open on the system (maintained automagically via any
> >open cygwin process), a couple of waitable objects (probably 1
semaphore
> >and 1 event) per open fifo, and finally a (pick a good buffer size)
> >shared memory region for doing the actual data transfer.
>
> How about just using actual pipes?  You could duplicate handles
between
> processes.
>
> I don't know if pipe semantics are the same as fifos but I suspect
that
> they are.
>
> cgf
>

Didn't you and Corinna have huge problems with pipes on win95? If so I'd
rather create a round wheel. Egor is suggesting the fifo's are many
writers to many readers, with no cohesion.. I don't think that's the
same as anonymous pipes...



Rob



More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list