Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 20:27:59 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Slowdown Message-ID: <20020630002759.GA20659@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com References: <3D1B4043 DOT EF2CA37A AT ieee DOT org> <3D1B4043 DOT EF2CA37A AT ieee DOT org> <3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 20020627224059 DOT 0080d5b0 AT mail DOT attbi DOT com> <20020629031639 DOT GA14536 AT redhat DOT com> <005801c21f59$e116e680$0100a8c0 AT advent02> <20020629172702 DOT GA29746 AT redhat DOT com> <010101c21fca$3dbc7150$0100a8c0 AT advent02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <010101c21fca$3dbc7150$0100a8c0@advent02> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 01:08:19AM +0100, Chris January wrote: >>I think you can take it as a given that I at least run bash and start a >>few programs before I release a snapshot or check something in. So, >>cygwin should not be basically broken from my point of view. > >I wasn't implying that you hadn't tested it at all. Rather, I was >interested in whether the error I was seeing was unique to me, or >whether other people had seen the same error too (e.g. Pierre). For >example, the tty dup error that I see 50% I start bash is pretty much >unique to me due to the way I have modified cygwin.bat. But other >errors may be experienced by more than one person and those should be >given higher priority. What I was trying to say was that reporting an error that occurs when doing something as simple as just running bash and a program is undoubtedly going to need a lot of tracking down on your end. If you and Pierre can exchange notes and figure out what's going on then that's great. >>If this still happens to you after today's checkin, then I'd really >>appreciate if you could track the problem down. > >I'm doing so now. I have already provided a full stack backtrace, but >I will attempt to track the error done myself. I saw the full stack backtrace. It made no sense to me or I would have investigated further. If I was reading it correctly, cygwin was trying to free some memory during initialization that should have been NULL. AFAICT, it was trying to allocate the fd table during startup. The fd table should have been NULL at that point. cgf