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:	<3BC5DBF2.7080705@ece.gatech.edu>
Date:	Thu, 11 Oct 2001 13:50:42 -0400
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010726 Netscape6/6.1
X-Accept-Language:	en-us
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Andy Piper <andyp AT bea DOT com>
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: More problems with subprocesses in 1.3.3
References:	<4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 2 DOT 20011009125357 DOT 00b61b50 AT san-francisco DOT beasys DOT com> <4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 2 DOT 20011011094427 DOT 00b7bc60 AT san-francisco DOT beasys DOT com>

Andy Piper wrote:

> At 01:07 AM 10/11/01 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 

>>
>> Andy - can you try a snapshot of the cygwin dll?  There have been a 
>> lot of changes in the process handling code between 1.3.3 and pre1.3.4.
> 
> 
> Sure, although I am a little wary. Since I started using 1.3.3 I have 
> also seen my entire machine lock-up (NT 4.0) a couple of times. 


Ugh.  That's not normal.  (Honest!  We wouldn't release a kernel with a 
bug like that if we knew about it -- and many many folks have been using 
1.3.3 on NT for months now without any reports like yours.)

Is there something unique about your machine, or your usage patterns? 
(e.g. do you do everything from an XEmacs subshell, thus exercising the 
fork/exec code more heavily than "normal", etc etc?)

> When 
> this happens my productivity goes through the floor 


Yeah, I imagine so.  :-(

> so I backed up to 
> 1.3.2 and haven't had any more lockups.


Well, I understand ylogic -- but this "fix" doesn't please me. :-) 
consider: "Xemacs-21.4.3 is completely broken on my machine, so I 
reverted to 21.1.13.  I'll try 21.4.x again in a few months -- hope you 
guys get the problem fixed...."  would not make you happy, would it?

Anyway, I hope we can get to the bottom of this problem...

--Chuck


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -