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:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version; q=dns; s=default; b=DGeXUPnxRotj2SmBvkhdKcHsNlhPu DwG2Gq6mZIRkq5LoHV43Hxe5NJvM9AOWkER0FqFRPGwzzjXrA2SRxb6mQkh5c2KJ fGrqYob026ZWnVUY5cQvMtE2WyfSv9sYujQkGJTphAkDoKx0DtPofDEtgEUXWly9 AGeO2KQYzcjttM= 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:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version; s=default; bh=Ojb4b9rQFr5BAoTjvBQCq0HHZsc=; b=IaR bULbl4DBVq3lfhw3tJYFVHZnljK056HV+UtGISc6/EOKSYmoXn4q9k5Cr7ryu98C t3LPD1kfL7XZPQWKBZ3SNo/TLG76Rx/jOrF9ukKnuQl2oLrWBNOJjR+XB4C5O+r7 Id6it/TQDZkKog5Pp4jh9RDZ18/I/TXhYQUBrTjw= 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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,MIME_BASE64_BLANKS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com From: "Habermann, David (D)" To: "cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" Subject: RE: mintty startup message: /sbin/nologin: No such file or directory Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 20:03:40 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20150321164125 DOT GB15431 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> In-Reply-To: <20150321164125.GB15431@calimero.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: 046-CH1MMR1-004.046d.mgd.msft.net X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: dow.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is 65.52.44.158) smtp.mailfrom=DAHabermann AT dow DOT com; cygwin.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:65.52.44.158;CTRY:US;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;BMV:1;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(428002)(199003)(46034005)(189002)(50466002)(2900100001)(87936001)(86362001)(47776003)(2656002)(101416001)(86146001)(54356999)(76176999)(55846006)(23676002)(50986999)(6806004)(2950100001)(104016003)(450100001)(2351001)(62966003)(77156002)(33656002)(106466001)(110136001)(92566002)(107886001)(46102003)(22756005)(105586002)(2501003)(102836002)(106116001)(2920100001)(22746005)(79686002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:DM2PR0101MB1184;H:mail.bsnconnect.com;FPR:;SPF:None;MLV:sfv;A:1;MX:1;LANG:en; X-CrossPremisesHeadersPromoted: BL2FFO11FD053.protection.gbl X-CrossPremisesHeadersFiltered: BL2FFO11FD053.protection.gbl X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR0101MB1184; X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(5005006)(5002010);SRVR:DM2PR0101MB1184;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR0101MB1184; X-Forefront-PRVS: 05220145DE X-OriginatorOrg: dow.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Mar 2015 20:03:41.6391 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: c3e32f53-cb7f-4809-968d-1cc4ccc785fe X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=c3e32f53-cb7f-4809-968d-1cc4ccc785fe;Ip=[65.52.44.158];Helo=[mail.bsnconnect.com] X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR0101MB1184 X-IsSubscribed: yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id t2LK417n004715 >LDAP can't have to do with that, in theory. The whole mechanism should give a sane result even if LDAP >connections fail, because the core part is the call to LookupAccountSid and that's the only call which has to >succeed. Certainly my speculation of the cause is exactly that....speculation. My observations, however, are sound and very reproducible on my machine. If cygserver starts up rapidly after boot the result is not desirable, whereas if cygserver start up is delayed (either done manually or via delayed service startup), then the result is good. I'll be happy to do any testing you might like on Monday, but this weekend is a busy one for me so I likely won't be able to do much until the work-week. Dave