Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <049901c19a21$d884baa0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> From: "Robert Collins" To: References: <20020110214350 DOT 30413 DOT qmail AT lizard DOT curl DOT com> <048201c19a20$afd86530$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20020110215727 DOT GB30469 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: Am I using dumper.exe correctly? Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 08:57:49 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jan 2002 21:57:48.0334 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7828CE0:01C19A21] I'm going to do a fine toothed comb look this weekend. === ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" To: Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:57 AM Subject: Re: Am I using dumper.exe correctly? > On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 08:49:31AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: > > > >=== > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Jonathan Kamens" > >To: > >Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:43 AM > >Subject: Am I using dumper.exe correctly? > > > > > >> We're using cygwin-1.3.6-6 on our build servers and current versions > >> of just about all the other packages. We get occasional crashes in > >> cygwin processes during our automated builds, so I decided to debug > >> them as follows: > >> > >> 1) Build the current CVS repository configured like this: > >> > >> CFLAGS="-g -O" configure --enable-threadsafe \ > >> --enable-extra-threadsafe-checking --enable-debugging \ > >> --enable-vfork > > > >Hmm, I'm not sure that enable-threadsafe has any impact anymore, in 2000 > >we removed some of the thread/non thread options - and looking closely I > >think that the removal wasn't as accurate as it could be. Anyway, I > >suggest not passing either thread option to cygwin. > > I meant to mention that. Maybe we should just nuke the options? > There's no way that cygwin will work in non-threadsafe mode anymore. > > cgf >