Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2000/09/01/16:33:46
On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 12:19:35AM +0400, Egor Duda wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Saturday, 02 September, 2000 Chris Faylor cgf AT cygnus DOT com wrote:
>
>>>something like that. snapshot taken from sourceware ( DLL build
>>>2000-08-25-23:55-EST) shows the same behavior. currently, as a
>>>workaround, i've applied this patch (that looks more like dirty
>>>hack), just to make things work, but i think that such change can
>>>likely broke something else. any comments?
>
>CF> Yep. Sorry but the patch makes no sense. The only effect of calling
>CF> proc_can_be_signalled over your change would be to wait for the
>CF> signal handler thread to call 'SetEvent (wait_sig_inited)' in the
>CF> unpatched version.
>
>i've reproduced this under gdb and see that if i call
>proc_can_be_signalled it won't do wait_for_me() but skip to
If it's not calling wait_for_me() then why is it hanging?
>return ISSTATE(..), and process_state is zombie.
>
>CF> If that is never happening, then there is something seriously wrong
>CF> somewhere.
>
>CF> Do you have a simple test case for this scenario, even if it takes
>CF> a bunch of repetitions to trigger?
>
>export CVS_RSH=/usr/local/bin/ssh1
>export CVSROOT=:ext:cgf AT some DOT server:/some/path/
>cvs co module
>cvs status file_in_module
>
>since i have my cvs tree already pulled, i use only last command, but
>i presume you'll see "no children" diagnostics at checkout
"simple test case" == "some minimal number of c instructions demonstrating
the behavior".
cgf
- Raw text -