On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 11:00, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
> My local tests and all reports from rtems-users so far are successes.
Meanwhile, there are failure reports or at least "non full success
stories" from rtems-users, c.f.
http://www.rtems.org/ml/rtems-users/2004/september/msg00144.html
http://ww
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:38:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:24:06PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>>At any rate, trying to get status without waiting should be considered
>>a bug, and not a feature that Cygwin should work around. Will someone
>>take responsibi
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:24:06PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>At any rate, trying to get status without waiting should be considered
>a bug, and not a feature that Cygwin should work around. Will someone
>take responsibility to notify the bash maintainer?
Ronald, I think this one is yours a
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:01:50PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 12:35:14PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> >Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 11:01:23PM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
> >> >Ok. Running 09/14/04 snapshot is looking *good* so far.
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 12:35:14PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 11:01:23PM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
>> >Ok. Running 09/14/04 snapshot is looking *good* so far. I stopped the
>> >test script at 150 passes.
>> >
>> >I'm starting my confi
Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 11:01:23PM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
> >Ok. Running 09/14/04 snapshot is looking *good* so far. I stopped the
> >test script at 150 passes.
> >
> >I'm starting my configure/build/redo test and will let that run
> >overnight. I'll check
: RE: 1.5.10: expr + configure failure + testcase
> (also on 1.5.11-1)
>
>
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > Grr... This was the newlib problem previously mentioned.
> I forgot to
> > generate the snapshot in such a way as to work around this problem.
> >
>
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Grr... This was the newlib problem previously mentioned. I forgot to
> generate the snapshot in such a way as to work around this problem.
>
> The new snapshot should work better.
Indeed it does. I have tried a couple of times without any hickups.
With 1.5.11 a have
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 11:01:23PM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
>Ok. Running 09/14/04 snapshot is looking *good* so far. I stopped the
>test script at 150 passes.
>
>I'm starting my configure/build/redo test and will let that run
>overnight. I'll check in tomorrow AM and report on that. 1 succ
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierre A. Humblet
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 10:04 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: 1.5.10: expr + configure failure + testcase
> (also on 1.5.11-1)
>
>
> On
Chris,
Ok. Running 09/14/04 snapshot is looking *good* so far. I stopped the test script at
150 passes.
I'm starting my configure/build/redo test and will let that run overnight. I'll check
in tomorrow AM and report on that. 1
successful configure/build so far.
Thanks!
-bogdan
--
Unsubs
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 04:00:41PM +0200, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>> Can someone try the snapshot please?
>
>Tried it, and I'm not able to open a shell with it. I have rebooted, so
>it's not some stray old process holding on to the previous dll.
>
>What I did: bunzip2 of the snapshot dll, shut down all
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 09:42:07PM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
>
> Anyway, the attached script (test-configure) will create the above configure.ac,
> generate configure (via. autoconf), and run the
> above line over and over until failure. I am also attaching cygcheck.out for my
> environment
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 10:25:52PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >I will create a snapshot with double the number of pids cached in
> >cygwin. This will cause the last 8 pids to be held from reuse by
> >windows.
>
> Hmm. I woke up this morning to see people busily flooding
> the airwaves
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 02:45:11AM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
>Chris, Pierre,
>> I was thinking the same thing but AFAIK, ash doesn't have the
>> pid recycling problem.
>
>In my failure cases, configure is run under bash.
>
>I have also captured (finally?) an strace under the ~current cygwin
>(
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 10:25:52PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>I will create a snapshot with double the number of pids cached in
>cygwin. This will cause the last 8 pids to be held from reuse by
>windows.
Hmm. I woke up this morning to see people busily flooding the airwaves
with more stra
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 08:11:39AM +0200, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>I was thinking the same thing but AFAIK, ash doesn't have the pid
>>recycling problem.
>
>Don't know where ash comes into play, the script is executed by bash.
>I must have missed some other test case...
Rem
Hi Peter,
> Yes, the new trace is with cygwin1.dll 1.5.11-1, the old one
> was with 1.5.10-3, sorry if I didn't mention that...
No, that's fine. It would have been significant if you *had not* upgraded and yet
produced that failure.
-bogdan
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#un
Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
> In your *new* trace there are the same trace (on line 176632)
> in the 'zone' between the fork() and the parent-shell exit decision
> point of your most recent trace.
>
> Did you update your cygwin since your last run? Perhaps its
> just an artifact? The set happens 4
Chris, Pierre,
> I was thinking the same thing but AFAIK, ash doesn't have the
> pid recycling problem.
In my failure cases, configure is run under bash.
I have also captured (finally?) an strace under the ~current cygwin (attached). The
details are largely the same as Peter's last
attachment
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 09:54:29PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> >The surprise is that the error message:
> >"configure: error: invalid package name: extra-includes"
> >is produced at time 29722848 by bash 2624 (the main script
> pid). This
> >is BEFORE the second
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 09:54:29PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>The surprise is that the error message:
>"configure: error: invalid package name: extra-includes"
>is produced at time 29722848 by bash 2624 (the main script pid). This
>is BEFORE the second expr is exec'ed. This occurs only at t
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 09:42:07PM -0400, Bogdan Vacaliuc wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> After (finally?!) noticing that a new release of the cygwin.dll was made on Sept. 4
> and being encouraged by the line:
>
> "- Fix mysterious configure script premature exit. (Pierre Humblet)"
>
> I decided to
Hello again,
After (finally?!) noticing that a new release of the cygwin.dll was made on Sept. 4
and being encouraged by the line:
"- Fix mysterious configure script premature exit. (Pierre Humblet)"
I decided to check against the latest public release. The problem continues to
persist, unfo
24 matches
Mail list logo
