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: <4F3C2E35.3080308@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:14:13 -0800
From: David Rothenberger <daveroth AT acm DOT org>
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> <4F3C208B DOT 2060007 AT acm DOT org> <20120215212010 DOT GA4183 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To: <20120215212010.GA4183@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: <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

On 2/15/2012 1:20 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 15 13:15, David Rothenberger wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> Thanks.  Btw., does that testcase fail in 1.7.9 as well?

I'm pretty sure it did. I think all the tests passed the last time I
released this package (2011-09-10), but I might have been testing
against a snapshot. It's hard for me to tell now. If I just install
1.7.9 on my system, things like /bin/ls stop working. The compiled tests
don't run, either.

FYI, the test was passing with 1.7.10 and the 20120214 snapshot. It
didn't start failing until your last snapshot (20120215).

-- 
David Rothenberger  ----  daveroth AT acm DOT org

Don't panic.

--
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