Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 01:36:32 -0400
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Cc: bdlow AT nortelnetworks DOT com
Subject: Re: i/o STOP + CONT (bash?) problem
Message-ID: <20000906013632.C7181@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, bdlow AT nortelnetworks DOT com
References: <968167382 DOT 14182 DOT ezmlm AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> <39B5B1FB DOT 14BDFF0D AT nortelnetworks DOT com> <20000905220710 DOT A6604 AT cygnus DOT com> <39B5DB5F DOT C05A7C09 AT nortelnetworks DOT com> <20000906013444 DOT B7181 AT cygnus DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i
In-Reply-To: <20000906013444.B7181@cygnus.com>; from cgf@cygnus.com on Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 01:34:44AM -0400

On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 01:34:44AM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:51:27PM +1000, Benjamin Low wrote:
>>Thanks for the prompt reply.
>>
>>Chris Faylor wrote:
>>...
>>> Um.  CTRL-S has nothing to do with the STOP signal.  
>>
>>As I understand (understood :-) it, the terminal driver issues various
>>signals to the current process in response to predetermined input
>>sequences (set via stty). Thus with the "standard" stty config, ctrl-C
>>sends an SIGINT, ctrl-S sends SIGSTOP, etc. This gels with my practical
>>experience in that kill -STOP|-CONT <pid> works the same as
>>ctrl-S|ctrl-Q (on every unix I've worked on (linux, solaris,
>>cywgin-sometimes).
>
>Sorry, you are understanding wrong.  CTRL-S (aka XOFF) does not send
>SIGSTOP.
>
>At a gross level, I guess you could say that sending a SIGSTOP to
>a signal stops a process similarly to the way that typing CTRL-S
>stops output but the two are really very different.
>
>You can verify this on linux by doing a 'ps' on a test process.  It will
>be in the 'T' state if you've do a 'kill -STOP' to the process.  It
>will also be in a 'T' state if you type CTRL-Z.
>
>It will be in some other state ('S', probably) when you've stopped the
>output with CTRL-S.
>
>For fun, once you've done this, try doing a 'kill -CONT' on the
>process where you just typed CTRL-Q.  You won't see any change.
			      CTRL-S

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com