X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:00:25 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cygwin 1.7.0-28: Broken pipe signal broken? Message-ID: <20080819030025.GA4204@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <1KV3KS-06K7k00 AT fwd26 DOT aul DOT t-online DOT de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1KV3KS-06K7k00@fwd26.aul.t-online.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 01:55:20PM +0200, Christian Franke wrote: >Result on 1.5.25-15: > >$ ./testpipe | dd bs=1 count=1 >/dev/null 2>/dev/null >[SIGPIPE!]write = -1, errno = 32 > >Result on 1.7.0-28: > >$ ./testpipe | dd bs=1 count=1 >/dev/null 2>/dev/null >write = 0, errno = 32 Yawn. I almost went to bed without remembering into this. Ther is a fix for this in CVS. I'm generating a snapshot now. Looking at the code that was there, I apparently had something in mind for SIGPIPE but it isn't clear what I was thinking. I guess that means that this change may cause other problems. Please let me know if it does. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/