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:reply-to:mime-version:to
	:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=IcGSvxnCIcplIia1
	c2sEhTw97YDQM71nXwVKQyU9Kw0mWG4mjZKVk2mhTnm+KuLdmzyWc48BYZEL2OsG
	g1mDAS7rRm5q8I2aOWyCNRjgtakRx6o9rgzUHc+Oqj/wxPSPR3+rT7Rjw1yItapi
	n/lP2Z8HvWjmE12JGoPv5WtbpIo=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Message-id: <5343035E.4000106@cygwin.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 15:58:22 -0400
From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh@cygwin.com>
Reply-to: cygwin@cygwin.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: 1.7.29-2: Exception from cygwin_gethostname
References: <5342F343.6050300@acm.org> <20140407190942.GU2061@calimero.vinschen.de>
In-reply-to: <20140407190942.GU2061@calimero.vinschen.de>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

On 4/7/2014 3:09 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Apr  7 11:49, David Rothenberger wrote:
>> I'm having a problem doing hostname resolution on one of my Windows
>> 7 64 machines after updating cygwin to 1.7.29-2. I first noticed it
>> with ssh. I get an error whenever I try to ssh to any machine using
>> a hostname; it complains the hostname cannot be resolved.
>>
>> An strace of ssh shows an exception occuring right after the call to
>> cygwin_gethostname is logged.
>>
>>     96   58624 [main] ssh 3536 cygwin_gethostname: name daver-pc
>> --- Process 3536, exception 000006ba at 000007FEFDD4940D
>>    860   59484 [main] ssh 3536 __set_errno: void san::leave():315 setting errno 14
>
> Exception 0x6ba is "The RPC server is unavailable".  I have no idea why
> this exception is generated at all on your machine.  Usually this is a
> first-chance exception only, which can be ignored, but this is the first
> time I ever saw this and in the above scenario there's no such exception
> expected, so it doesn't get ignored.
>
> Oh well, it would have been helpful if this had been encountered last
> week :(

Good point.  David, can you go back to last week and see if you can still
reproduce it? ;-)


-- 
Larry

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in 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