Mail Archives: cygwin/2011/12/01/10:47:49
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 10:24:27AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Nov 30 15:33, Jim Schneider wrote:
>> I updated today to 1.7.9-1 from an earlier install. Now, bash produces a series of dozens of exception lines like the following:
>>
>> 214713567 [main] bash 5368 exception::handle: Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION
>> 214714267 [main] bash 5368 open_stackdumpfile: Dumping stack trace to bash.exe.stackdump
>>
>> The contents of bash.exe.stackdump are:
>>
>> Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION at eip=6102048B
>> eax=00C40308 ebx=6124545C ecx=75110F81 edx=003C51F8 esi=00000000 edi=0028F9F4
>> ebp=61020C00 esp=0028C7C4 program=C:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe, pid 1928, thread main
>> cs=0023 ds=002B es=002B fs=0053 gs=002B ss=002B
>> Stack trace:
>> Frame Function Args
>> End of stack trace
>>
>> The address 6102048B is associated with line 82 of winsup/cygwin/dll_init.cc, which is in dll::init():
>>
>> /* Initialize an individual DLL */
>> int
>> dll::init ()
>> {
>> int ret = 1;
>>
>> /* This should be a no-op. Why didn't we just import this variable? */
>> if (!p.envptr)
>> p.envptr = &__cygwin_environ;
>> else
>> *(p.envptr) = __cygwin_environ; /* This is line 82 */
>>
>> /* Don't run constructors or the "main" if we've forked. */
>> if (!in_forkee)
>> {
>> /* global contructors */
>> p.run_ctors ();
>>
>> /* entry point of dll (use main of per_process with null args...) */
>> if (p.main)
>> ret = p.main (0, 0, 0);
>> }
>>
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> The pointer p.envptr is tested before an attempt is made to use it, so it looks like it is getting garbage. Disassembling the function dll::init shows that the edx register is being used to hold the address. It's holding 003C51F8, just short of 240K before the base address of bash.
>>
>> If I manage to run it down, I'll send a patch.
>
>I observed this problem myself a couple of times but I never found out
>what it is. It seems to be introduced by rebasing DLLs but even that
>is an assumption. What worked for me was to reinstall the packages
>which contain the DLLs loaded by the affected process. After that, the
>affected process worked. And even running rebase once more didn't break
>it again. Which is a pity, kind of, since that would have at least
>allowed to reproduce the situation. It would be very helpful if anybody
>could explain the effect and show how to fix it.
Actually, the problem is supposed to be greatly reduced, if not fixed,
in CVS.
cgf
--
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 -