Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3DD124EC.9090101@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:57:32 -0500
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jason Tishler <jason AT tishler DOT net>
CC: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: RFD: cygipc ENOSYS patch
References: <20021105153841 DOT GA1756 AT tishler DOT net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Chuck,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 10:38:41AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 08:35:41PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> > I'm getting tired of the "initdb hangs" class of complaints.  Why
>> > doesn't the relevant function fail if the ipc-daemon isn't running?
>> > Can anything be done in that area?
>> > Motivated by the above, I finally looked into this long standing
>> Cygwin PostgreSQL problem.  Specifically, Cygwin PostgreSQL will hang
>> and consume all available CPU cycles if cygipc's ipc-daemon is not
>> running when either initdb or postmaster is started.
>> > I'm proposing that the attached patch (against cygipc-1.11-1) be
>> applied to cygipc since it solves the Cygwin PostgreSQL hang problems.
>> Specifically, this patch changes cygipc's shmget() and semget() to
>> return ENOSYS instead of EACCES if ipc-daemon is not running.
> 
> See the following for the full details:
> 
>     http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-11/msg00136.html
> 
> The Cygwin PostgreSQL and KDE communities seem to be happy with the
> above.  Would you be willing to accept such a patch into cygipc CVS?
> 
> If so, then please let me know because I just found some more places
> where ENOSYS should be returned instead of EACCES.  However, I would
> like to gauge your interest before pursuing this further.


I've no objection.  But would somebody PLEASE tell me what the HELL 
we're waiting for with respect to the 64bit key_t change in newlib?

I've had a new release of cygipc waiting for months, predicated on that 
change, which I THOUGHT would happen "real soon".

Now, I have to revert all of that (I didn't make a branch point at the 
time -- why bother? the change was "imminent") before I release any 
other updates.

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-07/msg00314.html and following.

--Chuck



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/