Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 13:15:58 -0400
To: "'cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com'" <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: sig_send: wait for sig_complete event failed
Message-ID: <20000930131558.D29602@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: "'cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com'" <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
References: <13179A03C694D211B84700105A1E6C8B2FCFCF AT cfx-server DOT cfds DOT harwell DOT aeat DOT co DOT uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i
In-Reply-To: <13179A03C694D211B84700105A1E6C8B2FCFCF@cfx-server.cfds.harwell.aeat.co.uk>; from andy.mortimer@aeat.co.uk on Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 11:23:55AM +0100

On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 11:23:55AM +0100, Mortimer, Andy wrote:
>Chris Faylor writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:10:35PM +0100, Mortimer, Andy wrote:
>> >Hi Chris/list,
>> >
>> >Chris Faylor writes:
>> >>On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 12:01:52PM +0100, Mortimer, Andy wrote:
>> >>>1184486202 [sig] bash 28849 sig_send: wait for sig_complete 
>> >>> event failed, sig 11, rc 258, Win32 error 0
>> >> [...]
>> >As noted in another message, the latest snapshots didn't work for me,
>> >but I've applied just the patch referred to here and it has indeed
>> >stopped the hang.  Thanks, Chris! Now, I'm just left with the problem
>> >of bash segfaulting inside Cygwin's signal handling thread ...  ;-)
>> 
>> Are you saying that you took the changes from the snapshot, 
>> applied them
>> to 1.1.4 sources, and rebuilt a DLL?
>
>Yes.
>
>> Unfortunately, I can't decipher a snapshot if you're using a 
>> home grown
>> DLL unless you're willing to tell me what all of the 6100* addresses
>> resolve to symbolically.
>
>I know. :-(  
>
>> For that you can use 'addr2line' or gdb.
>
>I'd tried to use gdb to get this information, but I really 
>couldn't persuade it to play with me; I hadn't come 
>across addr2line before.  (I even went to the lengths 
>of getting ld to produce a map file, but I didn't get 
>very far with that either :-/ )  The addresses in the
>previous dump I sent resolve with addr2line to:
>
>6100922E stack_info::init(unsigned long) exceptions.cc:226
>6100922E stack_info::init(unsigned long) exceptions.cc:226
>6100A2A3 interrupt_on_return(unsigned long, int, sigaction &, void *) exceptions.cc:663
>6100A806 call_handler(int, sigaction &, void *) exceptions.cc:778
>6100AF00 sig_handle(int) exceptions.cc:972
>6103EE0E wait_sig(void *) sigproc.cc:1269
>6100331A thread_stub(void *) debug.cc:91
>77F04EE8 ?? ??:0
>
>I wasn't sure which DLL to look in for the last entry.  With 
>the changes I made to exceptions.cc, the lines referenced 
>above are:

I've added some more code to the snapshots in an attempt to work
around this problem.  I don't know if I was successful or not.  It's
hard to fix a problem when you can't duplicate it.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com