X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4F1C759D.9010704@shaddybaddah.name>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 07:46:21 +1100
From: Shaddy Baddah <lithium-cygwin AT shaddybaddah DOT name>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111114 Icedove/3.1.16
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: YA call for snapshot testing
References: <20120119195244 DOT GA763 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <CAGHJv4c2=5Gc-K_jTfbrjDUeE=uZumEFhCASU=ZHH3Q=AyCXmg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <jfeq4q$las$1 AT dough DOT gmane DOT org> <20120121181804 DOT GA26978 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1B6F71 DOT 8070407 AT shaddybaddah DOT name> <20120122054719 DOT GB28773 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20120122055300 DOT GB657 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1BBB0F DOT 2020009 AT gmail DOT com> <20120122165705 DOT GA10996 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1C5F56 DOT 8070208 AT gmail DOT com> <20120122193306 DOT GA12886 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-Reply-To: <20120122193306.GA12886@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
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

Hi,

On 23/01/12 06:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 08:11:18PM +0100, marco atzeri wrote:
>> On 1/22/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 08:30:23AM +0100, marco atzeri wrote:
>>
>>>> I saw the problem in erratic way also before running updatedb.
>>>> But it is very evanescent and usually linked on how find is called.
>>>
>>> Could you try the latest snapshot?
>>
>> snapshots 20120122 07:28:45 seems to have solved the issue
>
> Looks like my guess was correct.  I added refence counting to Cygwin's
> inaptly-named fhandler structures recently to work around a problem
> where a signal handler closed an fd while it was in the middle of a
> read.  This caused the memory associated with an fd to be deleted only
> when the last thing referencing it was done with it.
>
> The very odd thing was that my implementation seemed to work right from
> the beginning.  That has made me wonder what I got wrong.  What I got
> wrong was the dup*() family of functions.  If you dup a fd its reference
> counter was not reset so the memory associated with it was not deleted.
> Duh.
>
> Thanks for confirming.

Yes, I doubly confirm. All good now. Thanks for fixing this. Hopefully
no more stoppers to a triumphant 1.7.10 release.

And I can confirm a couple of other things. I encounter fewer
fork/rebase issues with this release.

And as per Corinna's call to test from a little while back,
vboxsharedfolderfs still seems to work without any breakage.

-- 
Thanks again,
Shaddy



--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple