Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Mon, 10 Jun 2002 12:31:26 -0400
From:	Jason Tishler <jason AT tishler DOT net>
Subject:	Re: Rebase 1.5-1: Causes invalid page fault
In-reply-to:	<20020610132949.76559.qmail@web21002.mail.yahoo.com>
To:	Nicholas Wourms <nwourms AT yahoo DOT com>
Cc:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-followup-to:	Nicholas Wourms <nwourms AT yahoo DOT com>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-id:	<20020610163126.GF716@tishler.net>
MIME-version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.4i
References:	<20020610131113 DOT GB716 AT tishler DOT net>
	<20020610132949 DOT 76559 DOT qmail AT web21002 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>

Nicholas,

On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 06:29:49AM -0700, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
> --- Jason Tishler <jason AT tishler DOT net> wrote:
> > Are you sure?  Under NT/2000, the error message would be something like
> > the following:
> > 
> [snip]
> 
> I guess it wansn't too clear, but I'm running WindowsME.

No, you were quite clear.

> I'm sure the
> error messages would differ slightly, but for the most part they appear
> similar.

I just grep-ed the code and your problem is occurring in a
different (albeit related) place.  Apache is failing in dll_init.cc's
reserve_upto(), not in dll_list::load_after_fork().  So, although rebasing
can possibly "fix" this problem, maybe you should try to figure out why
reserve_upto() fails under these circumstances under Me?

> I think it might be worth someone confirming or denying this on
> WinME/9x (with the latest cvs sources and your rebase utility).  If you
> need more information, I can provide it.  Shall I run a strace for you?

No.  Although I contributed rebase, I have no interested in slogging
through a strace log.  Sorry.

> Again, I must point out that there have been some definite issues (in the
> last month or two) regarding the differences in how nt and !nt deal with
> various aspects of file i/o.  I guess my hope was that someone could try
> rebasing with your latest rebase and the latest snapshot of cygwin1.dll. 
> I now know of someone who is looking into another !nt issue and has just
> such a setup on windows95.  I'll check and see if he can reproduce this
> error.  If so I'll report back.

OK, but I'm not sure how I can further assist you.

Jason

--
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 -