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: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:49:45 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: latest snapshot seems better wrt make -j hang problems Message-ID: <20040314034945.GA5250@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20040313171440 DOT GA7326 AT redhat DOT com> <4053D28D DOT 9000809 AT scytek DOT de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4053D28D.9000809@scytek.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:33:33PM -0500, Volker Quetschke wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >>I have been running the "make -j" cygwin breaker for about ten hours now >>with no hangs, no segvs, and no strange error exits. >Me too :-D it runs without error for 10h with 3300 iterations now. I've been running for more than 24 hours now with no problems. But, this isn't the first time I could claim that so it may not prove anything. >>I'm sure this is just because of the magical way in which I have my >>system set up but could anyone confirm or deny whether that this >>snapshot behaves better? >It is definitely better than all snapshots since 1.5.7, thanks! I think I'll just package this up and ship it, then. It's certainly an improvement even if it isn't perfect. Thanks for the feedback. cgf -- 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/