socat (http://www.dest-unreach.org/socat/) is a multi-purpose relay tool that can be used to connect sockets to pipes and vice versa, or terminal pty's to TCP sockets etc etc. I have found it a very handy tool to build VPN-like things in a environment where you cannot or do not want to modify the existing networking infrastructure.
The socat code comes with a test script for testing socat functionality. Prior to upgrading to cygwin 1.5.16 almost all socat options were functional under cygwin, except for a few that used the 'exec:'parameter. An example of a command that is failing is: ./socat -t 0.1 exec:'openssl s_server -accept 12002 -quiet -cert testsrv.pem' pipe & echo hallo | ./socat -t0.1 - openssl:localhost:12002,verify=0 this command runs fine on Linux but under Cygwin there is no output echoed back from the openssl s_server application. More specifically, the socat server process (first line) does return the output but it looks like the output never reaches the client - to me, that sounds like a pipe flushing problem or a line-termination problem. the command that I reported yesterday: echo "$(echo '\r')" is now working under a newly-compiled version of bash 3.0 in which I commented out the offending section in subst.c. An interesting note is that after I upgraded to cygwin 1.5.16 (from 1.5.14) yesterday) a few other options ALSO stopped working. I am not sure what has caused this. regards, JJ Keijser > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Dessent > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 17:54 > To: 'cygwin@cygwin.com' > Subject: Re: echo "$(echo '\r')" oddity > > Jan Just Keijser wrote: > > > thx for the quick answer. Lemme guess: I am going to have > to build my > > own version of bash that does not have this behaviour... > what is going > > to break if I undo this patch from the bash source code? > > > > It's a shame though, coz this seems to be the only issue that stops > > that nifty socat from working... all tests pass except those tests > > that use `` or > > $() ... > > My guess is that that patch was added so that command > substitution on windows programs works. Or something to that > effect. You could certainly recompile without it, and see > what happens. > > But the question that I think we're left with is what exactly > is socat doing that is broken by this? If you give examples > I'm sure someone here will be able to show you a way to do > what you want without patching anything. Note: I have no > idea what socat is... > > Brian > > -- > 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/ > This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you. -- 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/
