Re: "cat" breaks ANSI codes on Windows Terminal when piping stdout to python or golang

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 10:04:07 +0900 Takashi Yano wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 21:56:39 + > 5990 wrote: > > I ran all commands on cmd from within Windows Terminal. Note that running > > cmd.exe directly, and running cmd from the Windows Terminal is not the > > same. cmd.exe does not support ANS

Re: "cat" breaks ANSI codes on Windows Terminal when piping stdout to python or golang

On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 21:56:39 + 5990 wrote: > I ran all commands on cmd from within Windows Terminal. Note that running > cmd.exe directly, and running cmd from the Windows Terminal is not the same. > cmd.exe does not support ANSI codes. My question was: What shell (command user interface) di

Re: "cat" breaks ANSI codes on Windows Terminal when piping stdout to python or golang

Ignore my previous email; I forgot to enable plain text mode. I ran all commands on cmd from within Windows Terminal. Note that running cmd.exe directly, and running cmd from the Windows Terminal is not the same. cmd.exe does not support ANSI codes. Also, what do you mean you can't reproduce th

Re: "cat" breaks ANSI codes on Windows Terminal when piping stdout to python or golang

I ran all commands on cmd from within Windows Terminal. Note that running cmd.exe directly, and running cmd from the Windows Terminal is not the same. cmd.exe does not support ANSI codes. Also, what do you mean you can't reproduce the issue? Was it because of insufficient information, or becaus

Re: "cat" breaks ANSI codes on Windows Terminal when piping stdout to python or golang

On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 08:01:45 + 5990 via Cygwin wrote: > ## Bug: > Piping the standard output of cat into the standard input of golang or > python, makes the Windows Terminal render ANSI codes as arrows. > > For example: > `\033[36m` turns into `←[36m` (or in base64'd UNICODE: `4oaQWzM2bQ==`)

Re: cat fifo hang [Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] cygwin 3.3.0-0.2.6c1f49f83fde (TEST)]

On 10/17/2021 6:15 PM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: On 10/17/2021 4:52 PM, Chris Roehrig wrote:  Here's a script that pretty reliably hangs cat after some iterations. [...] Thanks!  I can reproduce the hang.  I'll look into it. I've done some debugging and have followed up on the cygwin-develo

Re: cat fifo hang [Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] cygwin 3.3.0-0.2.6c1f49f83fde (TEST)]

On 10/17/2021 4:52 PM, Chris Roehrig wrote: Here's a script that pretty reliably hangs cat after some iterations. [...] Thanks! I can reproduce the hang. I'll look into it. Ken -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentati

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 9:47 AM Hashim Aziz wrote: > I see. Do you know how I would go about resolving this, as I am using an > Administrator account and have never run into any other issues reading, > writing or otherwise making changes to those drives. As a side point: It is important to under

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

Vinschen Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2020 4:46 PM To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions On Mar 3 16:32, Hashim Aziz wrote: > Yes, this was what I expected you meant by elevated shell. I tried that > earlier and got no luck (though I tried the l

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

Greetings, Hashim Aziz! Please no top posting on the list. > An update to this, I resorted to nuking and then re-installing Cygwin from > scratch, and the problem STILL persists. This seems to suggest that > something is wrong with Windows itself that is responsible for Cygwin no > longer being a

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

, but what that something could be I have no idea anymore. From: Hashim Aziz Sent: 03 March 2020 4:32 PM To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions Yes, this was what I expected you meant by elevated shell. I tried

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

Greetings, Hashim Aziz! > This was an issue that I had previously in September of last year and sent > the issue to this mailing list ("win-mounts no longer displays anything when > doing "cat /proc/partitions") but the issue stopped occurring before I could > get around to diagnosing it. This iss

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

On Mar 3 16:32, Hashim Aziz wrote: > Yes, this was what I expected you meant by elevated shell. I tried that > earlier and got no luck (though I tried the link to the Cygwin terminal in my > start menu > not a desktop shortcut), and I just tried again after attempting several > permissions fix

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

r' retained as Hashim ownership of '/var' retained as Hashim Whether the above output is normal or not I'm unsure. From: Corinna Vinschen Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2020 10:44 AM To: Hashim Aziz Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cat /proc/partitions sh

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

On Mar 3 00:54, Hashim Aziz wrote: > Hey Corinna, thanks for your quick reply. > > Regarding the elevated shell - I'm unsure of exactly how to run an > elevated Cygwin shell? Right click on the Cygwin Terminal icon on the desktop, choose the item "Run as administrator". > I have attached the re

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

Aziz Cc: cygwin Subject: Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions On Mar  1 21:16, Hashim Aziz wrote: > This was an issue that I had previously in September of last year and > sent the issue to this mailing list ("win-mounts no longer disp

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

iz Cc: cygwin Subject: Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions On Mar  1 21:16, Hashim Aziz wrote: > This was an issue that I had previously in September of last year and > sent the issue to this mailing list ("win-mounts no longer disp

Re: cat /proc/partitions shows only devices, not partitions

On Mar 1 21:16, Hashim Aziz wrote: > This was an issue that I had previously in September of last year and > sent the issue to this mailing list ("win-mounts no longer displays > anything when doing "cat /proc/partitions") but the issue stopped > occurring before I could get around to diagnosing i

Re: cat /proc/version mainly broken

On Mar 18 19:08, Achim Gratz wrote: > Corinna Vinschen writes: > > Yikes. I change uname but missed to patch /proc/version as well. > > Fixed in git. Please try the latest developer snapshot from > > https://cygwin.com/snapshots/ > > Fix confirmed. Thanks for testing! Corinna -- Corinna Vin

Re: cat /proc/version mainly broken

Corinna Vinschen writes: > Yikes. I change uname but missed to patch /proc/version as well. > Fixed in git. Please try the latest developer snapshot from > https://cygwin.com/snapshots/ Fix confirmed. Regards, Achim. -- +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ Fac

Re: cat /proc/version mainly broken

On Mar 18 11:05, Alexander Kleinsorge wrote: > Hi Cygwin, > there is an Issue wit "cat /proc/version" (tested on 2 different Windows 7, > 64 bit PC, both had no issue some month ago). > > $ cat /proc/version > CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW version vaÜð0aìð0aìð0a0Ç0aìð0a (corinna@calimero) (gcc > version 7.4.0

Re: cat /dev/ttyS?

On 1/6/06, Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > oh, i found the 'cat /dev/ttyS1' really outputs, but it has a very > > *big* delay that leads me thought it does not response. is the > > output buffered? what do i do? thanks! > > Yes, cat with no options calls read(), which typically u

Re: cat /dev/ttyS?

> > oh, i found the 'cat /dev/ttyS1' really outputs, but it has a very > *big* delay that leads me thought it does not response. is the > output buffered? what do i do? thanks! Yes, cat with no options calls read(), which typically uses buffers. Try cat -u to get unbuffered output. Or there

Re: cat /dev/ttyS?

On 1/6/06, steven woody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/6/06, Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > steven woody wrote: > > > > > > why can't get incoming COM2 data by the following command: > > > > > > $ cat /dev/ttyS2 > > > > > > but i can get the data by other windows serial monitor pro

Re: cat /dev/ttyS?

On 1/6/06, Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > steven woody wrote: > > > > why can't get incoming COM2 data by the following command: > > > > $ cat /dev/ttyS2 > > > > but i can get the data by other windows serial monitor programs on the > > same port. > > ttyS2 is the third serial port. Th

Re: cat /dev/ttyS?

steven woody wrote: > > why can't get incoming COM2 data by the following command: > > $ cat /dev/ttyS2 > > but i can get the data by other windows serial monitor programs on the > same port. ttyS2 is the third serial port. The first serial port is /dev/ttyS0, so for COM2 you want /dev/ttyS1.

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> > > Yes, I'm still seeing the segfault in the latest > snapshot, but only > > > when run under gdb or strace. Here are some sample tests: > > > > > > $ cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA/\@ > e.out > > > cat: /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA/@: No such file or > > > directory $ # no

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, Chris January wrote: > > Yes, I'm still seeing the segfault in the latest snapshot, > > but only when run under gdb or strace. Here are some sample tests: > > > > $ cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA/\@ > e.out > > cat: /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA/@: No such fi

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> Yes, I'm still seeing the segfault in the latest snapshot, > but only when run under gdb or strace. Here are some sample tests: > > $ cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA/\@ > e.out > cat: /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA/@: No such file or > directory $ # no segfault $ strace -o cat_

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

See below for responses On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:13:32 -0400 (EDT), Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > I don't think it matters. I get the same exact results with both sh and > bash in any one of the cmd window, xterm, or rxvt. FWIW, the output below > was with cmd/bash. You *are* trying the latest snaps

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

I don't think it matters. I get the same exact results with both sh and bash in any one of the cmd window, xterm, or rxvt. FWIW, the output below was with cmd/bash. You *are* trying the latest snapshot, right? I'm not sure I understand what "there are no problems -- it just echos what I typed i

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

I have no clue if anyone thought to bring this up but how about telling us what combination shell and console that you use. Example: I use rxvt and bash combination (rxvt is console / bash is shell) and there are no problems -- it just echos what I typed if it can't access what I want. If I start

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Chris January wrote: > > However, the fix is not as simple as inserting a "size = > > bufalloc;" just before the RegQueryValueEx. When I do that, > > I get a SIGSEGV in the guts of iasperf.dll, which I have yet > > to track down. This happens on the second iteration, FWIW, >

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> However, the fix is not as simple as inserting a "size = > bufalloc;" just before the RegQueryValueEx. When I do that, > I get a SIGSEGV in the guts of iasperf.dll, which I have yet > to track down. This happens on the second iteration, FWIW, > with buffer increment of 1000. I'm going to i

Re: [OT] RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 07:28:19PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: >>-Original Message- >>From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Dave Korn >>Sent: 14 July 2004 18:26 > >>Well, the thread's more-or-less over now, I would have thought. > >Heh. It occurs to me to correct that typo while we're at it. Should

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > [some comments snipped below] > > -Original Message- > > From: Igor Pechtchanski > > Sent: 14 July 2004 19:30 > > > > > However, the fix is not as simple as inserting a "size = > > > > bufalloc;" just before the RegQueryValueEx. When I do that, I ge

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Jul 14 14:29, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > Since Dave is not subscribed to cygwin-developers anyway, I'll continue > this here. More below. Ok. That's why I wrote "mildly OT". > Can't for a while. Can you do me a favor and submit this as a fix, if you > have a copyright assignment for Cygwin?

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: Igor Pechtchanski > Sent: 14 July 2004 19:30 > > I concur; that is bad code. The variable unambiguously needs > > initialising, and since RegQueryValueEx damages it, it needs to be > > re-set each time round the loop. > > Not quite true. Turns out RegQue

Developer's list archive policy - was Re: [OT] RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

At 01:25 PM 7/14/2004, you wrote: > Still, I've sent in a subscription request anyway [Note Cc!]. I've never >paid much attention to that list before. I notice that even the list >archive is closed if you aren't subbed - surely that's a bit WJM? I can >understand having subscribers-only posti

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > [snip] > > In particular, the fact that you see a SEGV the second time round - > > which is what my analysis above demonstrates should happen if the size > > variable is NOT reinited each time round the loop

RE: [OT] RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Dave Korn > Sent: 14 July 2004 18:26 > Well, the thread's more-or-less over now, I would have thought. Heh. It occurs to me to correct that typo while we're at it. Should have done that first time round. [EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

Since Dave is not subscribed to cygwin-developers anyway, I'll continue this here. More below. On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski > > Sent: 14 July 2004 04:22 > > > Ok, the theory washed out. The code above

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jul 14 17:58, Dave Korn wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski > > > Sent: 14 July 2004 04:22 > > > > > Ok, the theory washed out. The code above is actually simply buggy. > > > When RegQuer

[OT] RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > Sent: 14 July 2004 18:15 > On Jul 14 17:58, Dave Korn wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski > > > Sent: 14 July 2004 04:22 > > > > > Ok, the theory washed ou

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Jul 14 17:58, Dave Korn wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski > > Sent: 14 July 2004 04:22 > > > Ok, the theory washed out. The code above is actually simply > > buggy. When > > RegQueryValueEx is called (2 lines below the arrow), the >

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski > Sent: 14 July 2004 04:22 > Ok, the theory washed out. The code above is actually simply > buggy. When > RegQueryValueEx is called (2 lines below the arrow), the > "size" parameter > is uninitialized, so, in effe

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Reini Urban wrote: > Igor Pechtchanski schrieb: > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Reini Urban wrote: > > > >>cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ > >>hangs forever. > > > > According to MSDN > > (

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

Igor Pechtchanski schrieb: On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Reini Urban wrote: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs forever. According to MSDN (): ...although you use the registry to collect performance

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > [snip] > > I didn't get around to trying the actual cat instruction he quoted. > > I'll try it now: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~> cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA > > Segmentation fault (core dumped) >

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:23:51PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 06:20:19PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > > > Perhaps bufalloc += max(bufalloc, 1000

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 06:20:19PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > > Perhaps bufalloc += max(bufalloc, 1000); > > > > Gack! I meant min() :) > > Ah, yes, that'd work (i.e., converge fast

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 06:20:19PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > Perhaps bufalloc += max(bufalloc, 1000); > > Gack! I meant min() :) Ah, yes, that'd work (i.e., converge faster). We might want to eventually explore something in betwee

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 06:20:19PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > Perhaps bufalloc += max(bufalloc, 1000); Gack! I meant min() :) > Sorry, but no. This will do nothing for the original problem. The idea > was that at some point you need the rate of buffer size increase to > overtake the r

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 12:21:50PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > bufalloc = 0; > > do > > { > > ==> bufalloc += 1000; > > > > > I have a theory that the performance data may be added in chunks larger > > than 100

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 12:21:50PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > bufalloc = 0; > do > { > ==> bufalloc += 1000; > > I have a theory that the performance data may be added in chunks larger > than 1000 bytes, so the fhandler just can't keep up with the amount of > data

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Igor Pechtchanski > > Sent: 13 July 2004 16:41 > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > > > > Sent: 13 July 2004 16:20

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: Igor Pechtchanski > Sent: 13 July 2004 16:41 > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > > > Sent: 13 July 2004 16:20 > > > > > David, > > > > > > since that doesn't look

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Dave Korn wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > > Sent: 13 July 2004 16:20 > > > David, > > > > since that doesn't look too good, I tried it on NT4 SP6 as well as > > on XP SP1. I can't reproduce the below problems in eit

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > Sent: 13 July 2004 16:20 > David, > > since that doesn't look too good, I tried it on NT4 SP6 as well as > on XP SP1. I can't reproduce the below problems in either system. > Does that only happen on W2K perhaps?

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

David, since that doesn't look too good, I tried it on NT4 SP6 as well as on XP SP1. I can't reproduce the below problems in either system. Does that only happen on W2K perhaps? Depending on the SP? Corinna On Jul 13 16:07, Dave Korn wrote: > Heh. Check this: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~> cd /pr

RE: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski > Sent: 13 July 2004 15:30 > To: Reini Urban > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Reini Urban wrote: > > > cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ > > hangs forever. > > According to MSDN > (

Re: cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ hangs

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Reini Urban wrote: > cat /proc/registry/HKEY_PERFOMANCE_DATA/@ > hangs forever. According to MSDN (): ...although you use the registry to collect performance data, the dat

Re: cat: snapshot 20040409 cures problem

On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 07:06:21AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The current cygwin-1.5.9 and snapshots up to 20040406 have exhibited an > intermittent problem with cat: the error msg "input file is output file" has > been presented during a long sequence > > cat f.1 f.2 f.3 ... f.n > f.

Re: cat not found

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Garcia, Lucy wrote: > I just re-installed cygwin for the nth time, but for some strange reason, > cat is not included. When I run cygcheck -c I get the following: > Cygwin Win95/NT Configuration Diagnostics > Current System Time: Thu Sep 04 12:49:52 2003 > [snip] > > Lucy Garc

Re: cat not found

You need the package textutils! $ ls /usr/bin/cat.exe -l -rwxrwxrwx1 Administ mkgroup_17408 Feb 19 2002 /usr/bin/cat.exe Ivan Hernandez Garcia, Lucy wrote: I just re-installed cygwin for the nth time, but for some strange reason, cat is not included. When I run cygcheck -c I get the fo

Re: cat crashes with ctrl-backslash

On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 12:08:59AM +0100, Huijing Zhou wrote: > Call cat with no parameter, press Ctrl-Backslash (or Ctrl-# with German > keyboard), cat will crash. I can reproduce this crash 100% with the > current version (2.0.21) of textutils and different versions of Cygwin. > Not surprisin

Re: CAT

"cat" is part of the textutils package. cheers, -Matt - Hello I wanted to download CAT utility as i am getting the message cat not found. any pointers where can i get it. Nomit -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting:

Re: CAT

At 10:38 AM 12/13/2001, you wrote: >Hello > >I wanted to download CAT utility as i am getting the message cat not >found. >any pointers where can i get it. May I suggest http://cygwin.com/packages/ for all your questions about packages? Larry Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED