[tahoe-dev] darcs on Windows

[Simon Marlow]

zooko wrote:
> Dear allmydata.org folks (especially RobK and Arno -- my fellow Windows 
> users) and darcs folks:
> 
> Have you seen this page?
> 
> http://wiki.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/WindowsConsoles
> 
> I've been running all this time with rxvt.exe, bash, and with 
> CYGWIN="codepage:oem tty binmode title".
> 
> I always have the problem of C-c leaving a lock file behind and the 
> problem of having to hit enter after each command, but as far as I know 
> I don't have any other problems, so I'm slightly skeptical about the 
> "worse things could happen" part.
> 
> The page is confused by suggesting that rxvt and bash are alternatives.  
> In fact one is a terminal emulator and one is a shell so if you're using 
> rxvt then you're also using bash.  (As I am.)
> 
> I intend to update that page (and to link to it from the Windows 
> Configuration page [1]) after I figure out what it should say.  Actually 
> I think I should just delete that page and integrate its contents into 
> WindowsConfiguration (and leave a forward link from WindowsConsoles to 
> WindowsConfiguration).
> 
> [1] http://wiki.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/WindowsConfiguration

I'm the one responsible for that page, and I wrote it after many hours 
spent figuring out why darcs didn't always catch Ctrl-C for me on Windows. 
  I also consulted the Cygwin folks about how native Windows programs 
(which darcs is) interact with the console under Cygwin.  That page is the 
result of my investigations.

I do understand the difference between rxvt and bash.  What I mean by a 
"Cygwin bash shell" is what you get when you select "Cygwin bash shell" 
from the start menu.  It's a Windows Console in which Cygwin bash is 
running, AFAIK.  I can see how this might be confusing - feel free to edit 
any way you see fit.  The point is to identify the console environment, not 
the shell, of course.  (the tricky case is the "Cygwin bash shell", in 
which the behaviour depends on whether you have CYGWIN=tty or not).

What I mean by "worse things could happen", is that darcs doesn't get a 
chance to clean up when you hit Ctrl-C.  I don't know a great deal about 
darcs internals, but I guess it relies on being able to clean up in order 
to leave the repo in a consistent state.  Maybe it's always possible to 
recover from a catastrophic failure using 'darcs repair', I don't know.

Cheers,
	Simon