Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:10:45 -0400 From: Jason Tishler To: Robert Collins Cc: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Quick testfeedback... Message-ID: <20010911111045.A2160@dothill.com> Mail-Followup-To: Robert Collins , cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1000209619.7293.196.camel@lifelesswks> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i Rob, On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 10:00:11PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: > I have tested this out on win95 for regressions, but not on NT > unfortunately... If some kind NT/2k user could test this I would be very > appreciative. I ran your test suite with the latest CVS and then again after applying your patch. In both cases, all tests except for pshared passed (as to be expected). However, after patching, pt skipped a lot of values. Is this because the implementation is much faster? I can send you the output from make check, if necessary. Also, broadcast.exe (prior to patching) GPF-ed with: The instruction at "0x6100f0cb" referenced memory at "0x00000000". The memory could not be "written". Jason