Thu Nov 12 23:02:00 GMT 2009
Jon TURNEY wrote:
> Fortunately, the X server
> binds it's socket pretty early in the startup, so this probably works
> pretty well, but in theory at least there is still a possible timing
> window in startxwin.bat.
Yep, and in my setup the X server *always* comes up too late.
> So it perhaps be useful if checkX retried the XOpenDisplay()
> periodically until the timeout was up (as xinit does)
In principle, the script calling checkX could do that, because ``checkX''
has return status 1 if it couldn't connect. But as I already pointed out
``startxwin.bat'' uses ``run'' as a wrapper for ``checkX''. => Definitely no
waiting and no passing on of the status of ``checkX'' to %errorlevel%, as
``run'' immediately goes background (unless called from an xterm, dunno
Since more people seem to have this problem (cf. also Olivia's post), I
repeat my question (essentially already posed by Ken Brown:
using ``run'' at all? If we really need a wrapper (do we?) wouldn't ``sh''
be a better one?
To push this even further: Do we really need two *independent* scripts,
``starxwin.bat'' and ``starxwin.sh''? Why can't the former just delegate to
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin-xfree