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:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=QWIZxyAA9MH/T448Dsn+rPepCyjy7lKPSy85PbWMueJ1PUmtccEWw
	46Rsn04uuM4O/E5kW4v1vzlurlAlDnnz+ZYSFGtaRAtcWRnMSs5pd66mNes0rffG
	2dZJbjyWjbndNpcOv4ZUDJdi2MtYGJFJANN4qguDvVLF80DfxfEcH0=
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:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	 bh=Ft5yYPkA2Vm7oQrskzTE+5KVGzg=; b=TavrceYjid78OjEBss8UXxqdYvkD
	6/YeyVYWVaSbAnrVSOOi/UkBEHj2YOEGJD5nXMPSFz9OaQflHp9DAHSRsXAGP5DR
	TH+Pn1zmnzRxe74s+SWJHXyyGi67zJxgkz6sCcP5uqpTJgv3acV7L1depmK65PE9
	edOlpya6jHJZVJ0=
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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-100.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GOOD_FROM_CORINNA_CYGWIN,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=course!
X-HELO: mout.kundenserver.de
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 12:57:11 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: Michael Haubenwallner <michael DOT haubenwallner AT ssi-schaefer DOT com>
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST: Cygwin 3.0.0-0.3
Message-ID: <20190205115711.GV3532@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: Michael Haubenwallner <michael DOT haubenwallner AT ssi-schaefer DOT com>,	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <announce DOT 20190130212227 DOT GP3912 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <19c5e653-890a-7c52-fde8-80df137223c9 AT ssi-schaefer DOT com> <20190131194813 DOT GT3912 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20190203111937 DOT GG3532 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <65068741-b05e-591f-1577-cab12650bee6 AT ssi-schaefer DOT com> <20190204142538 DOT GN3532 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <40c1cbd8-be88-86d6-2b66-ded51129f2c3 AT ssi-schaefer DOT com> <20190205094455 DOT GQ3532 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <bb3dce3e-8228-3eb6-6489-36e6aec81606 AT ssi-schaefer DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DWg365Y4B18r8evw"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bb3dce3e-8228-3eb6-6489-36e6aec81606@ssi-schaefer.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

--DWg365Y4B18r8evw
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Feb  5 12:28, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>=20
> On 2/5/19 10:44 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Feb  5 09:42, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> >> On 2/4/19 3:25 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>> Are you going to test the patched branch?
> >>
> >> Sorry, was indeed unclear: Yes, of course!
> >> Will start testing on Server 2012 while setting up a 2019 VM.
> >>
> >> For now, there's already this one patch I've been using with good succ=
ess,
> >> please add it to topic/forkables - the suspended thing is something di=
fferent:
> >> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2018-q2/msg00039.html
> >=20
> > The collision problem shouldn't be as bad anymore with 3.0, given the
> > new PID handling.  However, after spending a bit more time in the fork
> > code, it looks like not releasing the procinfo in the error case is a
> > generic problem so I'm inclined to apply it to master.
>=20
> Heh, thanks - was my original intent back in 2018.
>=20
> > While at it, there are quite a few spots in the code which end up
> > jumping to the cleanup code but only one of them calls TerminateProcess.
> > Wouldn't it make sense to move the TerminateProcess call into the
> > cleanup code to make sure the child process doesn't stay running
> > in some limbo state, not doing anything useful but not dying either?
>=20
> Seems to make sense indeed, and the suspended processes I do see sometimes
> may well be related to that.

Pushed.


Thanks,
Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer

--DWg365Y4B18r8evw
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=LDBw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--DWg365Y4B18r8evw--