From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CH87s-0002N1-Ep for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:54:40 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CH87r-0002Ma-WF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:54:40 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CH87r-0002MT-SJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:54:39 -0400 Received: from [144.254.224.140] (helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CH80b-0006Lp-0Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:47:09 -0400 Received: from cisco.com (edinburgh.cisco.com [144.254.112.76]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i9BLl5Sf014257 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:47:05 +0200 (MEST) Received: (from dfawcus@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List Logging/8.8.8) id WAA08237 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 22:47:01 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 22:47:00 +0100 From: Derek Fawcus Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] new feature: attach a process to emulated serial port Message-ID: <20041011224700.C8377@edinburgh.cisco.com> References: <20041011142629.C1087@edinburgh.cisco.com> <2ad73a0410110822151a58fc@mail.gmail.com> <20041011223803.B8377@edinburgh.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20041011223803.B8377@edinburgh.cisco.com>; from dfawcus@cisco.com on Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:38:03PM +0100 Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:38:03PM +0100, Derek Fawcus wrote: > BTW: Just what sort of program do you fork off of the serial port? Aha. You mentioned that at the start. So this is an issue with the standalone slirp package, not the slirp code compiled into qemu. It should be possible to 'fix' that in slirp, but that's a seperate issue. Another problem with the code (wrt windows) is simply does windows support a pseudo-terminal like thing? As this patch also requires them. It seems to support this under windows one would have to add a packet protocol on top of the byte stream (however connected) which can then pass the info about the status of the modem control lines. So all in all, there is no point in worrying about windows wrt this code :-) DF