X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: RE: Call for testing Cygwin snapshot
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:33:37 -0400
Message-ID: <B6C33E7A8278A0408B707C9B491720D4045316@STEELPO.steeleye.com>
From: "Ernie Coskrey" <Ernie DOT Coskrey AT steeleye DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id k3PKXieP000333

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com 
> [mailto:cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com]On Behalf
> Of Christopher Faylor
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 4:26 PM
> To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Re: Call for testing Cygwin snapshot
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 03:37:46PM -0400, Ernie Coskrey wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cygwin-owner
> >> [mailto:cygwin-owner]...
> 
> Btw, to the OP: *please* don't quote raw email addresses, especially
> when it's the cygwin or cygwin-owner email address.  Adding 
> this is just
> noise and helps increase the already incredible spam burden 
> presented to
> the cygwin and (especially) postmaster mailing lists.
> 
> >> Of Jerry D. Hedden
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 9:27 AM
> >> To: cygwin
>    ^^^^^^^^^^
> >> Subject: RE: Call for testing Cygwin snapshot
> >> 
> >> 
> >>As I said, these sort of problems started after the 2006-03-09
> >>snapshot.  I double checked, and the problem does occur with the
> >>2006-03-13 snapshot.
> >
> >I wonder if this might be related to the following:
> >
> >http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2006-02/msg01062.html
> >
> >The fix suggested in the original message -
> >http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2003-q2/msg00004.html - might
> >help.
> 
> You've pointed to my message which indicates that I've fixed this in
> another way.  And, the OP indicates that this hang was introduced in a
> specific snapshot so I don't see why this would be an issue in that
> snapshot.
> 
> Nevertheless, the patch in the message that you are referring to is
> still a band-aid and still will not be applied.
> 
> cgf
> 

Well, what I got from your message was that you were pretty sure that your fix may have addressed the problem, but not 100% sure.  That's why I posted this follow-up; it's possible that Jerry has found a scenario that causes this problem to occur.  Maybe not, but if he can reproduce it it would be worth checking.

I agree that the original patch is a band-aid and shouldn't be applied.  There were some follow-ups to that message that talked about different ways to address the problem, if it turns out that Jerry's problem is the same.

Ernie

--
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/