X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:12:32 -0700 From: clayne AT anodized DOT com To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: simple test triggers fork errs for me in 4/27 snapshot Message-ID: <20060517031232.GV1783@ns1.anodized.com> References: <200605161408 DOT k4GE8TVs013464 AT tigris DOT pounder DOT sol DOT net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200605161408.k4GE8TVs013464@tigris.pounder.sol.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Assp-Spam-Prob: 0.00000 X-Assp-Whitelisted: Yes X-Assp-Envelope-From: clayne AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 09:08:28AM -0500, Tom Rodman wrote: > If I revert to the April 3 snapshot it works fine. For the 4/27 > snapshot, it's repeatable, the commands above resulted in fork errors > when I tried it just after after a reboot today, and again after all > cygwin processes had been killed. I see this under 20060309 as well. -cl -- 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/