Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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:	Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:49:13 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To:	Douglas Philips <dgou AT mac DOT com>
cc:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Python 2.4.1 locking bug. (was: Re: rebaseall failure?)
In-Reply-To:	<48DB8564-4883-4C6F-956A-E7A81B99E7FD@mac.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.GSO.4.61.0507280945020.27026@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
References:	<20050727164719 DOT GA1816 AT tishler DOT net> <5782337 DOT 1122488184052 DOT JavaMail DOT dgou AT mac DOT com> <20050727182912 DOT GB8798 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <7429953 DOT 1122490121496 DOT JavaMail DOT dgou AT mac DOT com> <20050727190657 DOT GA2272 AT tishler DOT net> <10309717 DOT 1122492940641 DOT JavaMail DOT dgou AT mac DOT com> <20050727205229 DOT GA3876 AT tishler DOT net> <216554 DOT 1122499538914 DOT JavaMail DOT dgou AT mac DOT com> <20050727232925 DOT GA21845 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <D11CBDB3-3C32-4E2E-AC92-9D3D7A47D858 AT mac DOT com> <20050728124826 DOT GC2704 AT tishler DOT net> <48DB8564-4883-4C6F-956A-E7A81B99E7FD AT mac DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Douglas Philips wrote:

> On Jul 28, 2005, at 8:48 AM, Jason Tishler wrote:
>
> > Doug,
> > > I don't know. When I saw the Python message it seemed plausible.
> > >
> > > The real issue is that Python broke with 1.5.18, either because of
> > > the pthread change or not.
> > > Be that as it may, should I report this bug in another forum?
> >
> > No, this is the right mailing list.  However, you can increase the
> > probability of it getting fixed by helping to isolate the problem.
>
> That's why I culled down my large application to a small Python script
> which exhibited the bug and which I submitted to the list, along with my
> cygcheck -srv and the error messages that Python gave me.

So your test case is currently a small Python script, plus *all* of
Python.  I'm not downplaying your effort in producing the test case, just
explaining Jason's statement about "isolating the problem".

> > Besides submitting a patch, a minimal C test case is the best way to
> > go.
>
> ??? A minimal C test case for a python bug... I'm confused.

Python is written in C.  Since the bug is to be fixed in Python, isolating
the part of the C code that exhibits the problem would help fixing the
bug.

> I will submit my tbp (in a different form) to the official python
> release for inclusion in their self-tests, and hopefully that'll prevent
> _this_ bug from showing up further, whether on Cygwin or some other
> platform...

Yep, that's why it's good to have the small Python test case as well. :-)
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA

--
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 -