Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<00b001c02fdf$d6a7af60$f7c723cb@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	<cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
References:	<17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E11A AT IIS000> <20001006123856 DOT I3094 AT cygnus DOT com>
Subject:	Re: make[5]: execvp: C:/Cygwin/bin/bash.exe: No more processes
Date:	Sat, 7 Oct 2000 08:53:16 +1100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	06 Oct 2000 21:49:26.0304 (UTC) FILETIME=[4BD81A00:01C02FDF]

I'm about to get the latest snapshot code to try stefans experimental ioctl
patch.

To the woodcutter song:
"I'm a guinea pig an I'm ok,
I test code and aI crash all day...."

Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Faylor" <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: make[5]: execvp: C:/Cygwin/bin/bash.exe: No more processes


> On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 04:21:39PM +0200, Bernard Dautrevaux wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Chris Faylor [mailto:cgf AT cygnus DOT com]
> >> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 2:47 AM
> >> To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
> >> Subject: Re: make[5]: execvp: C:/Cygwin/bin/bash.exe: No more
> >> processes
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 08:40:10PM -0400, Guy T. Moore Jr. wrote:
> >> >Cygwin'ers:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >I've somewhat narrowed down a make error based on the level
> >> >of nested makes but using our build system the way it is.
> >> >i.e.: I cannot prove that my error is only related to the
> >> >      number of nested makes.
> >> >
> >> >So I guess this is stack related or some other resource that
> >> >I would like to bump up.
> >> >
> >> >What resource is my error related to, and can I bump it up
> >> >using what command?
> >>
> >> Since the only message you're getting is "no more processes", I
> >> would guess that it may be accurate.  How about adding a 'ps -ef'
> >> to each recursion, to verify.
> >>
> >> cygwin 1.1.4 only allows a limited number of processes.  I've removed
> >> this limitation in the snapshots.  Now you can have as many processes
> >> as Windows allows.
> >
> >Sorry, this is the answer to my preceding e-mail... should have read th
> >ewhole thread (my own excuse is that outlook had split the thread for
some
> >mysterious reason...)
> >
> >>
> >> So, two things:  1) try adding the 'ps', and 2) try a snapshot.
> >>
> >
> >Thanks; however I'll probably wait for the next cygwin release :-)
>
> That's a shame.  It's likely that there will be problems in the next
release
> if no one tests the snapshots.
>
> cgf
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
>
>


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -