Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:03:05PM -0800, Kevin Layer wrote: >> >Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >> > >> >>> > This problem is killing me. I'm currently looking msysgit + GnuWin32 >> >>> > because I just can't take the crashes of bash.exe and git.exe anymore. >> >>> > In my testing, so far, I've never seen msysgit or the bash that comes >> >>> > with it crash. Why is it that cygwin has this problem but msysgit >> >>> > does not? It's an honest question and I'm not trying to be >> >>> > provocative. I've been a cygwin user since before Red Hat acquired >> >>> > them, and the above statement makes me really sad. >> >>> >> >>> Have you tried running rebaseall? >> > >> >Absolutely. After updating cygwin, I reboot and run rebaseall -v >> >first thing. >> >> FYI, as far as I can tell the stack trace that you provided did not seem >> to come from the 20120123 snapshot.
I'll investigate that. >> >> >>> If not, install the rebase package and >> >>> read its README to get the proper procedure for running rebaseall. This >> >>> is a classic error message indicating colliding DLL addresses. Rebaseall >> >>> (and sometimes peflags) are the prescribed solution in these cases. >> >>> >> >>> If that doesn't solve the problem, a complete problem report would be >> >>> helpful. >> > >> >I have no idea how to make a reproducible test case of my system, >> >composed of 50+ repos, is large and not open source. We have shell >> >scripts that we use to apply git commands to each repo. >> > >> >One thing I've mentioned before: the problem became much worse when we >> >switched development to a 16-core machine. It's running Server 2008 >> >R2. >> > >> >Does anyone at Red Hat run on such a large-core machine? >> >> Why does that matter? This is a free software project staffed by one >> Red Hat person and a lot of people from other institutions. I'm really not sure what you're getting at... I was merely asking if the developers of Cygwin have tested on a 16-core machine. I think my problems all started when I and my developers started using it. >> >The machine has been memtested, btw, and msysgit on the exact same >> >repos operates flawlessly, in my tests so far. All other non-cygwin >> >software on the machine works perfectly, too. >> > >> >If you think a bug report without a reproducible test case would be >> >useful, let me know what info I can provide. >> >> Hmm. Can you actually conceive of a situation where, when reporting a >> bug, a reproducible test case is NOT useful? No, but I'm not a Cygwin expert, so I thought I'd ask. >> Barring a reproducible test case you could provide some of the >> information that I asked for in the thread that you're responding to. >> And, we always want to see cygcheck output with the additional details >> asked for. I'll read over the thread again and post it shortly. Kevin -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
