Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:37:15 +0300
From:	egor duda <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
X-Mailer:	The Bat! (v1.53 RC/4)
Reply-To:	egor duda <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
Organization:	deo
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
Message-ID:	<1493522465.20011118173715@logos-m.ru>
To:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
CC:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: pthread_mutex_init fails
In-Reply-To:	<00c501c17037$188e84b0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
References:	<200111171814 DOT MAA29795 AT duracef DOT shout DOT net>
	<20011117194703 DOT GA27975 AT redhat DOT com> <2615386444 DOT 20011118002102 AT logos-m DOT ru>
	<028f01c1702f$d438a360$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>
	<19373219704 DOT 20011118162457 AT logos-m DOT ru>
	<00c501c17037$188e84b0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>
MIME-Version:	1.0

Hi!

Sunday, 18 November, 2001 Robert Collins robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au wrote:

RC> ----- Original Message -----
RC> From: "egor duda" <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>

>> the problem remains that the patched code still won't work on w95, but
>> the current code doesn't work at all!

RC> The current code should run fine on w95 and 2k - it did for me before
RC> committing it 0 I tested on both 9x and 2k.

RC> However the bug is likely the cause for Jasons continued python
RC> failures.

really? have you checked if exactly one thread wakes up when condition
variable is signaled? i _can't_ see how current code can work at all.
please run winsup.api/pthread/condvar3_1.c test on w2k and tell what
the result is. btw, are you sure you've been testing on stock w95? or
it was w98? or osr2? msdn says that InterlockedIncrement() behavior
changed from w95 to w98 and from nt3.5 to nt4.0.

again, i can't see how current code can work at all either on w95 or
on w98 or on nt or on w2k. what exactly have you tested?

Egor.            mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19

- Raw text -