Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-12 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 12 13:47, Denis Excoffier wrote: > On 2014-02-11 21:39, Denis Excoffier wrote: > > On 2014-02-11 10:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> On Feb 10 16:09, Warren Young wrote: > >>> On 2/10/2014 15:53, Denis Excoffier wrote: > > I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-12 Thread Denis Excoffier
On 2014-02-11 21:39, Denis Excoffier wrote: > On 2014-02-11 10:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Feb 10 16:09, Warren Young wrote: >>> On 2/10/2014 15:53, Denis Excoffier wrote: I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as for the 3rd and 4th: windows complaint that th

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-12 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 11 14:41, Warren Young wrote: > On 2/11/2014 02:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > >Can you please both test the snapshot DLLs from today? Both versions, > >32 and 64 bit, work fine for me on Windows 8.1. > > Sunshine and butterflies: > > $ uname -a > CYGWIN_NT-6.3-WOW64 amanita 1.7.29s(0.

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-11 Thread Warren Young
On 2/11/2014 02:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Can you please both test the snapshot DLLs from today? Both versions, 32 and 64 bit, work fine for me on Windows 8.1. Sunshine and butterflies: $ uname -a CYGWIN_NT-6.3-WOW64 amanita 1.7.29s(0.271/5/3) 20140211 18:42:13 i686 Cygwin -- Problem repo

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 11 21:39, Denis Excoffier wrote: > On 2014-02-11 10:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Feb 10 16:09, Warren Young wrote: > >> On 2/10/2014 15:53, Denis Excoffier wrote: > >>> > >>> I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as for the > >>> 3rd and 4th: windows complaint that t

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-11 Thread Denis Excoffier
On 2014-02-11 10:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Feb 10 16:09, Warren Young wrote: >> On 2/10/2014 15:53, Denis Excoffier wrote: >>> >>> I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as for the >>> 3rd and 4th: windows complaint that this is not a windows image. >> >> Confirmed. > > C

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 10 16:09, Warren Young wrote: > On 2/10/2014 15:53, Denis Excoffier wrote: > > > >I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as for the > >3rd and 4th: windows complaint that this is not a windows image. > > Confirmed. Can you please both test the snapshot DLLs from today? Bo

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-11 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 10 23:05, Denis Excoffier wrote: > Hello, > > I use XP SP3 with 32 bits and also Seven 32 bits. Today i could exercise 4 > new snapshots. > > The first two had the same problem (tested on XP): it seems that every > program that has to perform something in connection with user/id/passwd e

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-10 Thread Warren Young
On 2/10/2014 15:53, Denis Excoffier wrote: I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as for the 3rd and 4th: windows complaint that this is not a windows image. Confirmed. Using my new friend, objdump -x, I get an interesting complaint about the snapshot DLL: "There is an imp

Re: snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-10 Thread Denis Excoffier
On 2014-02-10 23:05, Denis Excoffier wrote: > Hello, > > I use XP SP3 with 32 bits and also Seven 32 bits. Today i could exercise 4 > new snapshots. > I can see another one, dated 22:17:21 UTC. Same problem as for the 3rd and 4th: windows complaint that this is not a windows image. Denis Exc

snapshots dated 20140210 fail

2014-02-10 Thread Denis Excoffier
Hello, I use XP SP3 with 32 bits and also Seven 32 bits. Today i could exercise 4 new snapshots. The first two had the same problem (tested on XP): it seems that every program that has to perform something in connection with user/id/passwd etc. produces a stackdump (id, tar etc.). The last tw