DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	 q=dns; s=default; b=kKt6+/YKQveNNlvHV5QFcdRWOEukm/hXIabAW3nka6G
	8nwXHj5rks6ucjwGfHN08dhRIwf+GdRJ1qjyO9ypaorJOeiaJBpLCzWFhQln3IbU
	UdDvq0JvHAmzzluy6JF3o5UeNkO0RCT7t1jJp7v5AoZN6wrtLjBkSZS1SR+nqU98
	=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Message-ID: <51BC0352.2090600@cs.ucla.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:01:54 -0700
From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: bug#14569: 24.3.50; bootstrap fails on Cygwin
References: <51B78346.3050600@cornell.edu> <FA9D25B7-3D1F-40CC-AA6E-5347E8112CA4@swipnet.se> <E143AC75-8C2B-4A59-81F6-571B9D4EEF13@swipnet.se> <2E06A322-530C-4AA2-9282-6D2E48B1D194@swipnet.se> <51B8BEFE.6070309@cs.ucla.edu> <51B8D5ED.1010407@alice.it> <C679A2B2-0264-4DDA-B900-5B90BE7CF1E9@swipnet.se> <51BA03CA.4080804@cs.ucla.edu> <BEC82502-E9FD-4F8E-B91E-F680F6885FB2@swipnet.se> <51BB56CB.7030209@cs.ucla.edu> <20130614180359.GA5295@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
In-Reply-To: <20130614180359.GA5295@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 06/14/2013 11:03 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> You pointed to an archived mail messages which implies that was fixed
> more than a year ago.  What makes you think it is still a problem?

The message I pointed to <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2012-05/msg00472.html>
says this:

  > Testcase signal/kill:
  > Signals may or may not reach the correct thread with 1.7.12-1 and newer.

  Confirmed.  I think the reason is that we only have a single event to
  signal that a POSIX signal arrived instead of a per-thread event, but
  I'm not sure.  This is cgf's domain so I leave it at that for now.

I interpreted this to mean "the existence of the bug is confirmed,
here's why the bug occurs, and I'll let cgf deal with it".
I didn't see any followup message where cgf (is that you?)
dealt with it.  My apologies if I misinterpreted the email.


--
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