On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 03:30:34PM -0500, Paul Ingemi wrote: >* On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:55:22AM -0500 Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:25:32AM -0500, Paul Ingemi wrote: >[...] >> It is a simple enough hack that I don't mind adding it, if it fixes your >> problem but I am not convinced that your driver is operating correctly. >> >> As I had added serial port access to the Windows version of VICE one or >> two months ago, I can tell that the com0com driver is indeed buggy. >> >> IMHO, the better solution is to fix com0com, and not to apply some >> hotfixes to other software (cygwin, VICE, whatever). That's the approach >> I followed, too, ignoring com0com completely. If I might have some time, >> I might want to debug com0com myself, but don't hold your breath on it. > >I agree and adding a hack to cygwin isn't necessary due to the >existance of a workaround. That said, I think it's premature to blame >com0com without finding the root cause of the problem. > >Over the past two days I've been attempting to create an -mno-cygwin >executable that can reproduce the behavior I'm seeing under Cygwin. >Thus far I haven't successfully reproduced this behavior outside of a >Cygwin environment despite copying most of the code for how Cygwin >performs select() and read().
I don't really see why it is necessary to stand you your head here. Your change added a function call which, as far as I can tell from documentation, should be a no-op. The change is not required for normal serial operation. To me, that shows pretty clearly that com0com is doing something nonstandard. 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/
