Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2002/10/22/11:05:33
Here is what I get with 100 files in config.nt and all 2.04 binaries:
[...]
Applying djgpp_wchar_h to sys/djtypes.h
Cannot open script file for $SHELL: Permission denied (EACCES)
Applying io_quotes_def to sys/ioctl.h
c:/devel/djgpp/bin/find.exe: error waiting for rm: No child processes (ECHILD)
c:/devel/djgpp/bin/find.exe: c:/devel/djgpp/gnu/build.gcc/gcc/include/.. changed during execution of c:/devel/djgpp/bin/find.exe
Cleaning up unneeded directories:
fixincludes is done
[... build continues ...]
There is still something fishy going there.
Charles Sandmann wrote:
> Did you increase files in \WINNT\SYSTEM32\CONFIG.NT?
Is default of 40 too small for building GCC? Well I increased files to
100, with the results above.
> Andrew builds on XP; but I haven't seen an NTVDM crash in a long time
> on W2K. Double check binaries for old non-fixed system() code?
There were some old binaries, most notably find. And fileutils were
compiled with 2.04, but without last patch for rm. Now I have all 2.04
libc binaries, with the results above.
>> Cannot open script file for $SHELL: Permission denied (EACCES)
> ?? Files?
Sorry, I don't get you there :)
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Sounds like your system doesn't have enough resources to open file
> descriptors. (The equivalent of FILES= directive in CONFIG.SYS.) Does
> the explanation and the advice in section 9.7 of the FAQ help in any way?
The log above is slightly different with 100 allowable files and all
2.04 binaries than it was before, however I doubt that 40 files were
not enough previously. I still haven't tried running that code under
debugger. Yet.
> It might be educational to write a program that opens its own .exe file
> until `open' fails, and count the number of times it succeeded. Then do
> the same with `dup' instead of `open', and see what's the count now.
With 40 files in config.nt I have 37 successful opens and 255
succesful dups. With 100 files - 97 and 255. Everything seems OK
according to FAQ, doesn't it?
Andrew Cottrell wrote:
> One vital item that you DO need to ensure in order to build GCC 3.2 on 2K or
> XP is that you need to use FileUtils 4.1 patched or rm.exe from 4.0 or
> rm.exe from core utils once you do the first build. Grab the FileUtils 4.1
> patched source code from clio.
My fileutils previously was latest 4.1 compiled with 2.04 but without
rm patch. But together with this patch, well, things still are
interesting...
BTW, some time ago I wasn't able to reproduce the problems you have
encountered on XP with rm using my 2K installation... rm seemed to
work just fine for me.
Laurynas
- Raw text -