X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4F3C208B.2060007@acm.org> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:15:55 -0800 From: David Rothenberger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120208 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: STC for libapr1 failure References: <4F3A14A8 DOT 4090506 AT acm DOT org> <20120214140240 DOT GB25918 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20120214144551 DOT GC25918 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F3AA0BB DOT 7000806 AT acm DOT org> <20120214182452 DOT GK25918 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F3AD58A DOT 9040106 AT acm DOT org> <20120215153851 DOT GQ25918 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F3C09D9 DOT 6000406 AT acm DOT org> <20120215204521 DOT GB27454 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> In-Reply-To: <20120215204521.GB27454@calimero.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 2/15/2012 12:45 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Feb 15 11:39, David Rothenberger wrote: >> On 2/15/2012 7:38 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> Did I mention that I hate synchronization problems? Anyway, I think I >>> found the problem. I applied a patch which fixes the problem for me >>> and, surprise!, the flock test still runs fine, too. I've just uploaded >>> a new snapshot. Please give it a try. >> >> All the procmutex tests pass now! Awesome! >> >> But... now one of the flock tests is failing. It takes a while to >> extract a STC from the APR test suite because everything is written in >> APR-ese and I have to convert every APR call into the base C library >> calls. I'll work on that over the next day or three. >> >> The gist of the test that's failing is this: >> >> * Create a file. >> * Get an exclusive flock on it. >> * Spawn a child process that attempts to get an exclusive, non-blocking >> lock on the file. >> >> The test is expecting that the child will not be able to get the lock, >> but the child is able to. > > Did I really mention that I hate synchronization problems? Yeah, you mentioned it. :-) > Does it fork/exec or does it only exec? Looks like fork/exec. execv to be precise. > I guess I really need the testcase. I'll try to work on that tonight. -- David Rothenberger ---- daveroth AT acm DOT org -- 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