X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10203041609.AA16669@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: New Win2K/XP bug report
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
Date:	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 10:09:33 -0600 (CST)
Cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com (DJGPP developers)
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1020304175022.11860A-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Mar 04, 2002 05:52:20 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> > > If so, we could change system.c and/or dosexec.c to do that on W2K.
> > > (That might lose long command lines, but losing the whole pipe is much 
> > > worse, I think ;-)
> > 
> > The problem only appears to happen if you are sending the output from
> > a Win32 executable to a DJGPP executable stdin.  DJGPP to DJGPP or Win32 
> > to console or Win32 to Win32 all seem to work OK.
> > 
> > That's a pretty ugly test.
> 
> Not really: dosexec.c already has a test for PE executables, so it 
> already knows what kind of program is it about to run.  All we need is to 
> run PE programs on W2K via the system shell.

I'm not sure that's going to fix it.  Win32 PE executables run fine 
alone right now (no reason to change this) - it's only a problem with
the pipe.  If we are sending it to a file, why does piping fail?

For example, under bash, finger @bajor | more
works just fine.

But finger @bajor | less
shows no output under bash (but works fine under cmd).

So it's a pipe issue.

> This will also catch some of the cases where we could invoke the program 
> directly, but so what?

Maybe I'm missing something on how running a shell will fix a pipe?

- Raw text -