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: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:52:02 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygdev Subject: Re: bash/cygwin leaking process handles Message-ID: <20001204115202.G2397@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygdev References: <3A2B5B4A DOT D7C85BE6 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <3A2B5B4A.D7C85BE6@redhat.com>; from vinschen@redhat.com on Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 09:52:26AM +0100 On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 09:52:26AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >Matt wrote: >> result: one process handle will be leaked for every repeat. There appear >> to be two handles leaked just starting the original bash, though. By >> handle leak, I am meaning that a process handle is still open to a process >> that no longer exists. > >Did you check that with 1.1.4 or 1.1.5 as well? Would be interesting >to know if that's a new problem. And, it would be interesting to have the problem debugged, actually. This is "cygwin-developers", right? cgf