starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-09-24 07:54:35 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

ENABLE_VIRTUAL_TERMINAL_PROCESSING is set by default in pseudo console on Windows 10 20H2. #12943

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-31 03:29:34 +00:00 by claunia · 14 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:34 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @tyan0 on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021).

Environment

Windows 10 20H2 (Version 10.0.19042.804)

Steps to reproduce

  1. Compile the following test code.
  2. Run the test program in pseudo console (e.g. in WSL).
#include <windows.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main()
{
	DWORD mode;
	GetConsoleMode(GetStdHandle(STD_OUTPUT_HANDLE), &mode);
	printf("%d\n", mode & ENABLE_VIRTUAL_TERMINAL_PROCESSING);
	return 0;
}

Expected behavior

At least on older Windows 10 such as 1809, the result is:

0

Actual behavior

On Windows 20H2, the result is:

4

Is this the intentional behavior?

Originally created by @tyan0 on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021). # Environment Windows 10 20H2 (Version 10.0.19042.804) # Steps to reproduce 1. Compile the following test code. 2. Run the test program in pseudo console (e.g. in WSL). ``` #include <windows.h> #include <stdio.h> int main() { DWORD mode; GetConsoleMode(GetStdHandle(STD_OUTPUT_HANDLE), &mode); printf("%d\n", mode & ENABLE_VIRTUAL_TERMINAL_PROCESSING); return 0; } ``` # Expected behavior At least on older Windows 10 such as 1809, the result is: ``` 0 ``` # Actual behavior On Windows 20H2, the result is: ``` 4 ``` Is this the intentional behavior?
claunia added the Resolution-Duplicate label 2026-01-31 03:29:34 +00:00
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:35 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@eryksun commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

Is this the intentional behavior?

Yes. See src/host/srvinit.cpp.

@eryksun commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): >Is this the intentional behavior? Yes. See [src/host/srvinit.cpp](https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/blob/8f9ccc55d16d1f803f01488f8b78d3cf09503fe5/src/host/srvinit.cpp#L155).
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:35 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

Yep, this is by design.

/dup #1965

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): Yep, this is by design. /dup #1965
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:36 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ghost commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

Hi! We've identified this issue as a duplicate of another one that already exists on this Issue Tracker. This specific instance is being closed in favor of tracking the concern over on the referenced thread. Thanks for your report!

@ghost commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): Hi! We've identified this issue as a duplicate of another one that already exists on this Issue Tracker. This specific instance is being closed in favor of tracking the concern over on the referenced thread. Thanks for your report!
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:36 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@tyan0 commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

Thank you for your quick response. Just a question from my interest, is it possible to disable this flag by default in pseudo console? Setting HKCU\Console\VirtualTerminalLevel to 0 does not take effect.

@tyan0 commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): Thank you for your quick response. Just a question from my interest, is it possible to disable this flag by default in pseudo console? Setting ```HKCU\Console\VirtualTerminalLevel``` to ```0``` does not take effect.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:36 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

A better question might be: why do you want to disable VT processing? It might help to better understand your scenario.

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): A better question might be: _why do you want to disable VT processing_? It might help to better understand your scenario.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:36 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@tyan0 commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

I asked just because I was interested. I don't have the scenario in which this behavior causes any problem so far.

@tyan0 commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): I asked just because I was interested. I don't have the scenario in which this behavior causes any problem so far.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:36 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@vefatica commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

I followed the link provided by @eryksun and I'm just curious ... is the conditional expression below (from srvinit.cpp) well-formed?

bool isEnabled = false;
if (SUCCEEDED(Microsoft::Console::Internal::DefaultApp::CheckDefaultAppPolicy(isEnabled) && isEnabled))
@vefatica commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): I followed the link provided by @eryksun and I'm just curious ... is the conditional expression below (from srvinit.cpp) well-formed? ``` bool isEnabled = false; if (SUCCEEDED(Microsoft::Console::Internal::DefaultApp::CheckDefaultAppPolicy(isEnabled) && isEnabled)) ```
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:37 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

@vefatica Sure is. That statement is basically two parts:

  1. CheckDefaultAppPolicy will get the state of the "default app policy", and stick it into the bool passed in. CheckDefaultAppPolicy will return true if it succeeded in looking that value up.
  2. Was the "default app policy" enabled?
@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): @vefatica Sure is. That statement is basically two parts: 1. `CheckDefaultAppPolicy` will get the state of the "default app policy", and stick it into the bool passed in. `CheckDefaultAppPolicy` will return true if it succeeded in looking that value up. 2. Was the "default app policy" enabled?
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:37 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@vefatica commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

In that case I'd expect it to look like this:

if (SUCCEEDED(Microsoft::Console::Internal::DefaultApp::CheckDefaultAppPolicy(&isEnabled)) && isEnabled)

@vefatica commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): In that case I'd expect it to look like this: `if (SUCCEEDED(Microsoft::Console::Internal::DefaultApp::CheckDefaultAppPolicy(&isEnabled)) && isEnabled)`
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:37 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

Meh, stylistic difference. Taking a param by reference means the callee doesn't need to worry about if the out param is null or not. Most of our newer code with out params (as few as those are) uses params by reference, rather than pointers.

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): Meh, stylistic difference. Taking a param by reference means the callee doesn't need to worry about if the out param is null or not. Most of our newer code with out params (as few as those are) uses params by reference, rather than pointers.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:37 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@eryksun commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

bool isEnabled = false;
if (SUCCEEDED(Microsoft::Console::Internal::DefaultApp::CheckDefaultAppPolicy(isEnabled) && isEnabled))

The only argument of the SUCCEEDED macro should be the HRESULT that's returned by CheckDefaultAppPolicy, in order to get a boolean result of success or not. Negative HRESULT values indicate failure. Doing a logical && on an HRESULT and a bool is incorrect.

@eryksun commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): > ``` > bool isEnabled = false; > if (SUCCEEDED(Microsoft::Console::Internal::DefaultApp::CheckDefaultAppPolicy(isEnabled) && isEnabled)) > ``` The only argument of the `SUCCEEDED` macro should be the `HRESULT` that's returned by `CheckDefaultAppPolicy`, in order to get a boolean result of success or not. Negative `HRESULT` values indicate failure. Doing a logical `&&` on an `HRESULT` and a `bool` is incorrect.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:37 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@vefatica commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

OK, didn't know that was by reference. And the second isEnabled being inside SUCCEEDED(). It just looks really funny to me.

@vefatica commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): OK, didn't know that was by reference. And the second isEnabled being inside SUCCEEDED(). It just looks really funny to me.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:38 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

oh no

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): oh no
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:29:38 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@miniksa commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021):

WELP. I am fixing this as MSFT:32071839. We will replicate that back out to fix my parenthesis error in the next day or so. Good catch and thank you.

@miniksa commented on GitHub (Mar 10, 2021): WELP. I am fixing this as MSFT:32071839. We will replicate that back out to fix my parenthesis error in the next day or so. Good catch and thank you.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label Resolution-Duplicate
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#12943
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?