Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 21:48:14 -0500 From: "Pierre A. Humblet" To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Please try the latest snapshot -- it is close to cygwin 1.5.6 Message-ID: <20031227024814.GA307687@hpn5170x> Mail-Followup-To: "Pierre A. Humblet" , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20031226204641 DOT GA46362839 AT hpn5170x> <20031224152951 DOT GA34487383 AT hpn5170x> <20031223222816 DOT GA23935 AT redhat DOT com> <20031224152951 DOT GA34487383 AT hpn5170x> <3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 20031224181524 DOT 007c21c0 AT incoming DOT verizon DOT net> <20031224232759 DOT GA12748 AT redhat DOT com> <20031226204641 DOT GA46362839 AT hpn5170x> <3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 20031226211336 DOT 00804140 AT incoming DOT verizon DOT net> <20031227024010 DOT GB25085 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031227024010.GB25085@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 09:40:10PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 09:13:36PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > >At 05:59 PM 12/26/2003 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >>I added strace debugging. You can use that as a clue for what I was > >>talking about and make it visible if you can't run exim under strace. > > > >I put a try_to_debug(1). Waiting for something to happen. > > Thanks, for debugging this but that wasn't specifically what I was > talking about. If you go back and read the message, you'll see that I > was talking about your 'get_proc_lock' problem. Yes, I put the try_to_debug just after the system_printf ("couldn't get proc lock By the way, I never saw any problems with exim on NT4 either... > >I looked at your latest change in syscalls.cc. > >It seems to me that setsid should simply call close all the time if (cygheap->ctty) > >and let close() take care of usecount. > > I had already checked in a change to this effect but I missed... The latest change I saw was not decrementing usecount at all, so it wouldn't do the right thing if inetd closes the tty after calling setsid > >Ditto in pinfo::set_ctty where a problem similar to the one you > >addressed also exists. > > this. Thanks. I've checked in a new fix as well as a similar change > for close_all_files. > > >I don't think that will take care of everything, but I can't follow > >what's happening when tracing sh -c inetd > > I tried the current CVS version and I don't see any stray tty garbage > with inetd. I never tried this with an older snapshot, however, so I > don't know if I would have been lucky before. I did try a much simpler > test case which worked incorrectly with CYGWIN=tty and correctly after > today's initial setsid change. OK, I'll run cvs update. Pierre -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/