Re: [1.3.3] breaks serial i/o?

["William A. Gatliff" <bgat at saturn dot billgatliff dot com>]

Christopher:


> >Suggestions, patches, signs of moral support, etc. would all be most
> >graciously accepted.  Thanks for the help,
> 
> No suggestions, patches, or signs of moral support here.
> 
> You realize that you had 52 lines in your message and the majority of
> your text dealt with the reason why you need to have your problem fixed,
> right?

Uh, I appreciate the time you spent analyzing the text of my email,
rather than its intent.  Note that my request began with the word
SUGGESTIONS.

> It is a curious phenomenon that people often seem to think that
> describing the fact that they are having a problem (with the usual
> accompanying sense of urgency!) is just the same thing as actually
> describing the problem in some detail.

At the moment, you're looking at all the detail I've got.  I've spent
the last day making sure that other stuff wasn't broken too, I was
hoping that someone would just say "oh yea, we know about that--- it
won't be fixed for a while."  Which would have given me all the
information I needed.

I did, in fact, get an answer like that.  And then I got yours.

> In the next expected step of this ritual bug reporting technique, a
> cygwin guru is supoosed to smack their heads and say "Serial I/O?!
> You're right!  It's broken!  Here's a fix."  Unfortunately, that's
> not the way it works.

I realize that.  You aren't dealing with your typical newbie here.

> If you want this fixed in 1.3.4 then you'll have to provide a test
> case which illustrates the problem or some kind of details that
> would help someone track down the problem.  For instance, I believe
> that http://www.sysinternals.com/ has a utility for monitoring
> serial I/O.  It might be useful to see what's going on with that
> utility to help track down the cygwin problem.

Hmmm, maybe you *did* read the intent of my email after all?  Perhaps
I misjudged you...  Nah.

> Otherwise, if you can't provide details that would allow to debug
> this, dropping back to 1.3.2 will be a short-term "solution" at best
> since 1.3.2 will disappear when 1.3.4 is released -- any day now.

Honestly, I'm actually thinking now that mingw would be a better
long-term solution.  I'm pulling all mention of Cygwin from the
article.


Thanks so much,


b.g.
-- 
Bill Gatliff
bgat@billgatliff.com