On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 06:11:35PM -0400, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote: >Christopher Faylor sent the following at Tuesday, May 10, 2011 1:19 PM >>If we changed the /dev/console to /dev/consN (where N is a unique number >>for each console window) would that address your use case? > >Yes, it works for me if there would be a reasonably small (preferably >single digit) number in the output of tty or ps.
Yep. That is the plan. >>You would not be able to do something like echo foo >/dev/cons4 and have >>foo be echoed another console window though. > >Since I haven't been on a real Unix/POSIX machine since the late '80s, >I'd forgotten about that. Now you made me want to DO it! :-) Heh. I knew I shouldn't have mentioned it. This was actually one of the first things that impressed me about Cygwin when I first started using it. Of course, when I first started it only worked about half the time, but still... The way I'm implementing this you should be able if /dev/consN is actually associated with a console but you won't be able to do anything other than verify existence. >>Eliminating the special case of tty handling >>would simplify the cygwin pty layer, shrink the size of the DLL, and >>generally make Cygwin a little easier to maintain. > >Even if you don't accommodate me, that's OK, if your lives will be >easier. As I wrote, if I find that I really miss tty identification, >I can learn to use mintty. (Or maybe I should just switch - but not >today.) I actually have the /dev/cons<small number> about 3/4 finished. If we do decide to get rid of CYGWIN=tty then /dev/cons may become /dev/tty<small number> again and ptys will become /dev/pty<small number>. 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
