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 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 02:01:30 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cygthread + rxvt Message-ID: <20020806060130.GE14302@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com References: <001e01c23cb5$403b4b10$6132bc3e AT BABEL> <20020805201505 DOT GA9710 AT redhat DOT com> <20020806053425 DOT GA14302 AT redhat DOT com> <032501c23d0e$ba25a160$6132bc3e AT BABEL> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <032501c23d0e$ba25a160$6132bc3e@BABEL> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 07:01:37AM +0100, Conrad Scott wrote: >"Christopher Faylor" wrote: >> Yep. That was an interesting race. Like most races, it was >really >> obvious once I found it. > >Sometimes I feel deflated after finding bugs: so interesting to >find but boring and trivial once found (and then there's testing). > >> It seems to work ok now but I haven't tested it rigorously. I >was lulled >> into a false sense of security before when I really *had* tested >rxvt. >> I just didn't try it enough times to notice that it failed 50% >of the >> time at least. > >I'll add my 2c of testing in a moment. And thanks for the mount_h >patch: from where I'd got in my vacant gazing at the code it looks >right. I'm going to have to draw a bl**dy big picture of the >whole DLL initialization / fork / spawn system one day; either >that or continue to limp along and hope someone more knowledgable >will fix the problems I find (or create) :-) Hey when you track them down so well, it's easy enough to fix them. The mount_h stuff still isn't "right" now that I think about it but it's 2AM so I should probably stop coding. cgf