X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 15:17:49 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: STC for libapr1 failure
Message-ID: <20120220141749.GA27701@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <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> <4F3C2E35 DOT 3080308 AT acm DOT org> <20120216140932 DOT GI19092 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F3D2748 DOT 8080205 AT acm DOT org> <20120216160458 DOT GK19092 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F401D73 DOT 7010908 AT acm DOT org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F401D73.7010908@acm.org>
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: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT 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 Feb 18 13:51, David Rothenberger wrote:
> On 2/16/2012 8:04 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Feb 16 07:56, David Rothenberger wrote:
> >> On 2/16/2012 6:09 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>> I read the Linux man page again (http://linux.die.net/man/2/flock)
> >>> and I just hacked the following testcase, based on your flock STC.
> >>
> >> That sounds pretty close to what the APR test case is doing, as far as I
> >> understand.
> >>
> >>> The testcase is attached.  I'm pretty curious what your test is actually
> >>> testing.
> >>
> >> I got to work at my real job all last night, so couldn't extract the STC
> >> from the APR test suite. But, here's the test in APR-ese in case you're
> >> interested. I'll remove the APRisms as soon as I can to get you another
> >> test case.
> 
> I've extracted the test case, which is attached.
> 
> I must humbly apologize. The test case was actually using fcntl() for
> file locking, not flock(). I got thrown off by the name of the test:
> "testflock". It seems APR prefers fcntl() for file locking if available.
> 
> The attached test works fine for me on Linux, but fails on Cygwin
> starting with the 20120215 snapshot.

As always, thanks for the testcase.  I think I found the problem.  It's
hard to explain if you don;t know how the code works, but it boils down
to the fact that my last round of patches back in August were not
actually fixing the problem, but only working around it.  I'm hopeful
that I got it right this time.  I'm just generating a new snapshot.
Please give it another hit with the APR testsuite.


Thanks again,
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