Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <2E300728EEF9D3119D8000E018C1864F5E428C@gemini>
From: "Mortimer, Andy" <Andy DOT Mortimer AT software DOT aeat DOT com>
To: "'cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com'" <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
Subject: RE: sig_send: wait for sig_complete event failed
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 05:49:35 -0600 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"


Chris Faylor writes:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 11:23:55AM +0100, Mortimer, Andy wrote:
> >> >>On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 12:01:52PM +0100, Mortimer, Andy wrote:
> >> >>>1184486202 [sig] bash 28849 sig_send: wait for sig_complete 
> >> >>> event failed, sig 11, rc 258, Win32 error 0
> >> >> [...]
> >> >As noted in another message, the latest snapshots didn't work for me,
> >> >but I've applied just the patch referred to here and it has indeed
> >> >stopped the hang.  Thanks, Chris! Now, I'm just left with the problem
> >> >of bash segfaulting inside Cygwin's signal handling thread ...  ;-)
> > 
> >6100922E stack_info::init(unsigned long) exceptions.cc:226
> >6100922E stack_info::init(unsigned long) exceptions.cc:226
> >6100A2A3 interrupt_on_return(unsigned long, int, sigaction &, void *) exceptions.cc:663
> >6100A806 call_handler(int, sigaction &, void *) exceptions.cc:778
> >6100AF00 sig_handle(int) exceptions.cc:972
> >6103EE0E wait_sig(void *) sigproc.cc:1269
> >6100331A thread_stub(void *) debug.cc:91
> >77F04EE8 ?? ??:0
> 
> I've added some more code to the snapshots in an attempt to work
> around this problem.  I don't know if I was successful or not.  It's
> hard to fix a problem when you can't duplicate it.

I know, and I appreciate your trying to fix it anyway!  Unfortunately 
I'm still unable to come up with a reproducible testcase -- the 
most reliable failure I have is still once in every four or five times, 
and deep inside a large shell script at that. :-(  

I will try to test the new snapshot sooner rather than later; I had 
a look just now, but the latest snapshot (2000-Sep-29) doesn't 
seem to include anything "obvious".  Is this the one I should try, 
or will the changes be in the next snapshot build?

Thanks,

Andy

-- 
Andy Mortimer, CFX Software Development
andy DOT mortimer AT aeat DOT com

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com