X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,TW_CG
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4EC432AC.5010506@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:01:16 +0100
From:	marco atzeri <marco DOT atzeri AT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: fork problem on latest cygwin CVS
References:	<4EC12860 DOT 3050507 AT gmail DOT com> <20111114153109 DOT GA21295 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4EC13D23 DOT 8040705 AT gmail DOT com> <20111114171105 DOT GA22991 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4EC27F70 DOT 60102 AT gmail DOT com> <20111115192202 DOT GB18893 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20111116191431 DOT GA7620 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-Reply-To:	<20111116191431.GA7620@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
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

On 11/16/2011 8:14 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 02:22:02PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 04:04:16PM +0100, marco atzeri wrote:
>>> On 11/14/2011 6:11 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI, the last thing any developer wants to hear after a major code
>>>> change is a generic "It's broke" report with no details and no way to
>>>> duplicate the problem.  A stack trace from a home-grown version of
>>>> cygwin1.dll is not a detail.  It's meaningless unless the addresses are
>>>> decoded.
>>>
>>> Ok,
>>> rewinding to step 1
>>>
>>> I simplified the test case to a short one, involving just 1 make call,
>>> using your snapshot
>>
>> Amazingly short.  Thanks very much! I can duplicate this and will fix
>> it.
>
> I've made some changes and can no longer duplicate the problem from your
> test case.  If you can confirm that the latest snapshot works for you I
> would appreciate it.
>
> As it turns out, this was a change I was planning on making "at some
> point in the future".  The future, apparently, is now.
>
> cgf
>

CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW64 1.7.10s(0.255/5/3) 20111116 04:41:29 i686 Cygwin

passed my crash test:
a full build of octave binary from scratch plus the make check.


Regards
Marco


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -