X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=tWfHDjBkEv65qSUy2MWJ0zB8r6BDY27/godtOX1w6kNkJHZ1JTIZ7
	4JHmm+RvxLBqtldNakFpBpRJATxAQCbEYjDcHl8V0FVshr0cCPQhsWlvcnLoDPOR
	5Sx4vNK5gfAXFw5xNinVxxaLvqFGXiHQ+pg+iG7WK0xYCYCqdU3TSk=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=7nbgZuGjnia/fUJLTSGMVkAy9BI=; b=lISs6Rn3WRhSu+Wij0gWQbememFl
	uEzEnB5rk7j7V2zjDwy7+P9owbSzeHBA+/SQ0ctV9c6DYVokBT4c2XNO3Wif+Cz8
	jD2YBYfKfiRaSopRS/2BR3vCu8+AJEGIphjAJ2F2rWt49BxEzEZBSxr8RBVUaCsU
	BRPmENWuFAHYVnE=
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
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Mail-Handler:	Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn
X-Report-Abuse-To:	abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User:	U2FsdGVkX191FYLSn7LsDo14i3CoJ78g
Date:	Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:51:23 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: emacs problem
Message-ID:	<20130710225123.GA7775@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<m9hik3kyjnk9 DOT fsf AT W0144758 DOT usac DOT mmm DOT com> <51DDAE03 DOT 2040209 AT cornell DOT edu> <20130710205538 DOT GA5740 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20130710211014 DOT GA2699 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <51DDD82F DOT 6050100 AT cornell DOT edu>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<51DDD82F.6050100@cornell.edu>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:54:55PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>On 7/10/2013 5:10 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:55:38PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 02:54:59PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>> On 7/10/2013 2:07 PM, J. David Boyd wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm starting to see this error quite a bit in the terminal window I started
>>>>> emacs from:
>>>>>
>>>>> 0 [main] emacs-X11 19400 C:\tools\cygwin\bin\emacs-X11.exe: *** fatal error in
>>>>> forked process - failed to create new win32 semaphore, Win32 error 87
>>>>
>>>> Have you tried rebaseall
>>>> (http://cygwin.com/faq.html#faq.using.fixing-fork-failures)?  This isn't
>>>> the typical error message you see from rebase problems, but it can't
>>>> hurt to try.  If that doesn't help, maybe you could test the build I
>>>> mentioned at
>>>
>>> That doesn't look like the standard fork problem, Ken.  The error comes
>>>from semaphore::_fixup_after_fork:
>>> ...
>>> Error code 87 is ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER.  The only two things that I
>>> can see which would cause that problem are "sec_non_nih" and
>>> currentvalue.
>>>
>>> I'll change the error to report on currentvalue.  I assume that
>>> currentvalue must be zero for some reason here and that is what is
>>> causing the problem but it would be nice to know for sure.
>>
>> The current snapshot has this change and a shot-in-the-dark attempt to
>> fix the reported problem as well.
>
>Thanks.  It's also possible that this isn't a Cygwin problem.  There are 
>known race conditions between emacs-24.3 and glib, which have been fixed 
>in the newer version of emacs that I asked Dave to test.

Given the point at which the problem occurs, I don't see how it could be
anything but a Cygwin problem.  It's in the fork code before anything
user-based should be kicked off.

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 -