X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:45:51 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: STC for libapr1 failure Message-ID: <20120214144551.GC25918@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <4F3A14A8 DOT 4090506 AT acm DOT org> <20120214140240 DOT GB25918 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120214140240.GB25918@calimero.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: 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 Feb 14 15:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Feb 14 00:00, David Rothenberger wrote: > > The libapr1 test cases are failing again for flock locks. This same > > test case failed with 1.7.9 with a fatal error[1], but that was > > corrected. The test is no longer encountering the fatal error, but > > it is producing the wrong result. > > Thanks for the testcase. I think I found the issue. An event handle > was closed in the wrong place, outside of the important mutex lock for > the lock object. I applied the patch to CVS. Your testcase now appears > to run fine for me. Can you try your entire testsuite again and see > if there's another failure lurking? I uploaded a snapshot for testing. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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