X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:subject:from:to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=KpR zFclfL+dG6RALeDZmI8UKLEyZAYjuIC4U9eRCIessfMMGiKAmXtJnhx6+/jqw2HD jixAYggojczY8nrGR4x5AQz5Cu2JkTp5nau7pDlog+e6kdjm1oWJv/L7//OlMsPh hQTAPhxtIYsfqAmL6TX2dDfodWeVxjkTTiHXkfsE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:subject:from:to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=IfMmOK+YD 27SNpgRC5r5Ad8QI08=; b=Wk/+Tl9ynXuMuUlTNBFXk8ZaS0y0JUbySB6ZUGURB ztejnsTkU+cylLuz17oOdL07ulbf+/z4rdyBzynd9xTNi6d9aZcquw4Om9qkgSJH AXuqZljeqUZ5tYIzOFafv5zWIqc/Oq0xzcxfCJ6qRnNQalD17sdwMiIVU277CnXg 1Y= 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: smtp-vbr13.xs4all.nl Message-ID: <50d82a8f1a79bf80e57e32d94078227e.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 12:01:58 +0100 Subject: Re: Testers needed: New passwd/group handling in Cygwin From: "J.H. vd Water" To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Corinna, (Sorry, have't found time to properly subscribe to the list, yet) >> Both cases show the same output: >> >> $ ./lsa >> pdom name: dnsname: <(null)>, sid: 0x0 >> adom name: sid: 0x246058 I "lied" here :-) The non-admin case showed: ... sid: 0x246060 (So, almost the same) >Huh. This looks entirely normal and expected. Which makes the >SEGV even more weird. I'm apparently missing something here. > >> Perhaps, it is best to stop here for the moment ... There must be more pressing >> things on your list. > >No, there aren't. This testing is very important. I'd like to >have such crashes like yours fixed before this new code gets >released. >> Moreover, I already decided to use 'db_enum: files' in /etc/nssswitch.conf (and >> XP is a thing of the past, is it not?). But who will still be using XP within a company after after april 2014?'. So, does have XP priority? Your decision, of course ... >I'm going to make some tests on XP, but if I can't track this down, >would you mind if I send you a test Cygwin DLL with extended debug >output to help tracking it down? The best thing to do, I believe, if you want to fix 'XP' (my machine may turn out to be a "misfit"). However, I have started afresh with the 18/2 snapshot ... Same result: getpwent crashed (db_enum: local) ... getgrent is ok. Send me a cygwin1.dll? Ok, if you tell me how to handle the thing (i.e. include some pointers to documents that I must read in order to be able to get results). Henri -- 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