Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:51:23 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: bug in ash (Was: State of the DLL, mark 2?)
Message-ID: <20010326105123.A12801@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20010319203650 DOT A30559 AT redhat DOT com> <907012433 DOT 20010320162719 AT logos-m DOT ru> <20010320091254 DOT F32706 AT redhat DOT com> <2710465067 DOT 20010320172451 AT logos-m DOT ru> <20010320101715 DOT K32706 AT redhat DOT com> <1983285237 DOT 20010321133832 AT logos-m DOT ru> <15325749005 DOT 20010322235224 AT logos-m DOT ru> <20010322161241 DOT A18144 AT redhat DOT com> <20010326113543 DOT A1725 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <20010326113543.A1725@cygbert.vinschen.de>; from vinschen@redhat.com on Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 11:35:43AM +0200

On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 04:12:41PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 11:52:24PM +0300, Egor Duda wrote:
>> >well, i've found the reason. moreover, i've found that as was once
>> >patched to fix this bug, but later, patch was reverted. i wonder why.
>> >did it have some ill side effects?
>> 
>> Hmm.  I vaguely remember this.  I remember asking Corinna to look into
>> this but neither of us had an actual test case that tickled the bug.
>> I can't find any email from Corinna explaining why the bug was backed
>> out but I wonder if I asked her to do this in a phone call or something.
>
>Correct. I have applied that patch but I never found the bug itself
>so Chris asked me to back out the patch again due to a patch for an
>unknown bug is somewhat weird.
>
>> I will wait for Corinna to come back from holiday so that she can offer
>> the definitive opinion, though.
>
>I will reapply Andy's patch again.

Thanks.  I'm glad to find out that this fixes a problem.  It sounds like
Andy's solution is the correct one, too.

Out of curiousity, did anyone check any of the *BSD sources to see if
this had been fixed there?

cgf