Mail Archives: cygwin/2004/03/02/17:30:13
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 02:27:33PM -0500, Volker Quetschke wrote:
>
>>>I can reproduce with that snapshot, but I get slightly different
>>>results. Here is the stderr output from 1052 runs, but the strange
>>>thing is that even when I get errors, the task continues to run. It
>>>seems somehow that the return code of the errored run gets lost or
>>>something.
>>
>>Are you still using this script:
>>
>>export C=1 while strace -o strace.$C.txt make -j ; do C=$(($C+1)) ;
>>done echo Failed after $C runs
>>
>>If yes: The strace catches the errors. I use a script without strace
>>and the while catches the error of the make command.
>
>
> Do you actually have an strace which demonstrates the problem? I
> don't any indication that you've duplicated this problem running
> strace with a "modern" snapshot.
I have reproduced the problem with a recent snapshot ('25), and strace,
but I am only using a single strace output file, so it keeps going and
over-writes the errored strace with the next run. I will run it tonight
while preserving all strace logs, but I can only run for about 1500
iterations before I fill my disk. I hope it happens before that.
Is there any way to tell strace to mimic the return code of it's
inferior process?
-Rolf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -