Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
From: "Andrej Borsenkow" <Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru>
To: <cygwin@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: RE: Two snapshot bugs
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:27:26 +0400
Message-ID: <000301c0334c$52ba8360$21c9ca95@mow.siemens.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <20001010123945.G3352@cygnus.com>

>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 11:14:29PM +0900, Kazuhiro Fujieda wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:47:16 +0400
> >>>> "Andrej Borsenkow" <Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru> said:
> >
> >> It is not command crashing. It is bash getting EOF sporadically
> and exiting.
> >
> >I've experienced the same problem on recent snapshots and NT 4.0 Sp6a.
> >The standard input of bash seems to be sporadically closed just
> >after fork() or exec() is invoked. But I can't find the patter of usage
> >to duplicate this problem.
>
> What is leading everyone to belive that this is an EOF and not just a case
> of bash crashing?  You seem to be assuming that since bash is
> silently exiting
> it must be seeing EOF, which is not necessarily true.
>

In my case, two observations:

- bash displays "logout" that it normally does when it gets EOF. So, it
_looks_ like bash is getting EOF. It does not crash (well, in usual sense :-)

- I've never seen this in 1.1.4 or below and bash is unchanged since then. So,
it _looks_ like some change in Cygwin.

I admit, it may be, that some post-1.1.4 change triggers obscure bug in bash.

-andrej


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com