Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-28 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 01:04:14PM -0500, Dave Steenburgh wrote: >I "fixed" the problem. I have not updated any software nor changed >any scripts, and yet I can no longer reproduce these behaviors. I am >absolutely certain that there is more than one problem here, and I >hope someone takes a clos

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-28 Thread Dave Steenburgh
I "fixed" the problem. I have not updated any software nor changed any scripts, and yet I can no longer reproduce these behaviors. I am absolutely certain that there is more than one problem here, and I hope someone takes a close look at my previous posts. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-27 Thread Dave Steenburgh
Dave Steenburgh wrote: > And what is the significance of the duplicated lines that ps showed > me?  Each of three processes did indeed have a lock on an output file > from the most recent session, and yet all the information that ps > showed was identical to a previous session. I started a new ses

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-27 Thread Dave Steenburgh
Paul McFerrin wrote: > A process is not necesarily the real "problem".  All > process are processes that their parent has NOT done a wait(2) yet.  Since > these processes have called exit(2), they must hang around until a > wait(2) is completed so that the exit status can be returned to the pare

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-26 Thread Paul McFerrin
A process is not necesarily the real "problem". All process are processes that their parent has NOT done a wait(2) yet. Since these processes have called exit(2), they must hang around until a wait(2) is completed so that the exit status can be returned to the parent. You need to unde

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-26 Thread Huang Bambo
2009/11/27 Dave Steenburgh > > cgf wrote: > > Defunct processes are not necessarily indicative of a cygwin problem. > > This could easily be a problem with gnuplot. > > Given the sum of my own limited knowledge of the problem at hand (in > summary: every program involved is in my local cygwin dire

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-26 Thread Dave Steenburgh
cgf wrote: > Defunct processes are not necessarily indicative of a cygwin problem. > This could easily be a problem with gnuplot. Given the sum of my own limited knowledge of the problem at hand (in summary: every program involved is in my local cygwin directory), I figured it was best to ask here

Re: Defunct processes with 1.5.25-15; seemingly reproducible

2009-11-26 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:52:45PM -0500, Dave Steenburgh wrote: >It is my understanding that this problem is not easily reproducible. >Well, I've been reproducing it locally since last night. ?I'm going to >try leaving every cygwin-related process as-is as long as necessary, >in the hope of beatin