Good point. Indeed, there is some illogic in it, I've noted that too. Thus, I've been bugged (no pun intended) by that too. I tried to hold on to the basic layout from the former wiki, but I was wondering why the com0com is needed too. I thought maybe just because of the drivers for making a virtual port, but if you don't use the com-port, what's the point. That's why I found the original wiki very confusing too: it wasn't clear if it was talking about the same method to get a log, or not.Black_Fox wrote:No, named pipes are normal in Windows:milon wrote:I actually got a little lost with the named pipes. Isn't that a Linux thing?The wiki article is currently wrong IMO, the step 2 is totally redundant (and the whole block is called "Redirect to virtual serial port (com0com, Windows host)" instead of "Redirect to named pipe (Windows host)". If I set up a named pipe in VBox and then connect to it with Putty, why would I need to emulate COM ports?Wikipedia wrote:The Windows NT family of operating systems support named pipe clients and servers.
So, aparently, it's not? There are, in fact, two ways to do it?
Could you maybe explain in detail the second one (with the port(s)-stuff, so I can change it accordingly in the wiki (as two seperate ways to go at it).