Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com From: Chris Faylor Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:38:56 -0400 To: "'cygwin@sources.redhat.com'" Subject: Re: make[5]: execvp: C:/Cygwin/bin/bash.exe: No more processes Message-ID: <20001006123856.I3094@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com Mail-Followup-To: "'cygwin@sources.redhat.com'" References: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E11A@IIS000> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i In-Reply-To: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E11A@IIS000>; from Dautrevaux@microprocess.com on Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 04:21:39PM +0200 On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 04:21:39PM +0200, Bernard Dautrevaux wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chris Faylor [mailto:cgf@cygnus.com] >> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 2:47 AM >> To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com >> Subject: Re: make[5]: execvp: C:/Cygwin/bin/bash.exe: No more >> processes >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 08:40:10PM -0400, Guy T. Moore Jr. wrote: >> >Cygwin'ers: >> > >> > >> >I've somewhat narrowed down a make error based on the level >> >of nested makes but using our build system the way it is. >> >i.e.: I cannot prove that my error is only related to the >> > number of nested makes. >> > >> >So I guess this is stack related or some other resource that >> >I would like to bump up. >> > >> >What resource is my error related to, and can I bump it up >> >using what command? >> >> Since the only message you're getting is "no more processes", I >> would guess that it may be accurate. How about adding a 'ps -ef' >> to each recursion, to verify. >> >> cygwin 1.1.4 only allows a limited number of processes. I've removed >> this limitation in the snapshots. Now you can have as many processes >> as Windows allows. > >Sorry, this is the answer to my preceding e-mail... should have read th >ewhole thread (my own excuse is that outlook had split the thread for some >mysterious reason...) > >> >> So, two things: 1) try adding the 'ps', and 2) try a snapshot. >> > >Thanks; however I'll probably wait for the next cygwin release :-) That's a shame. It's likely that there will be problems in the next release if no one tests the snapshots. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com