X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_40,DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
From: "Heiko Elger" <heiko DOT elger AT t-online DOT de>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: "Bad address" error with redirection (stdout and stderr) in background process
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 20:41:23 +0100
Message-ID: <6811C728662A4A2180D060AA7D9E9200@gigabyte>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Christopher Faylor writes:

> If you are saying that the problem is not fixed in the most recent
> snapshot then please clearly say that.  Otherwise, I don't understand
> what you are asking.  I sent my email on January 11 shortly before the
> January 11 snapshot was uploaded.  There is no reason for you to expect
> a newer snapshot than that.
> 

In my first posting concerning this problem I posted tne used snapshot too
(20110111)

>I'm using latest snapshot and updated cygwin installation.
>
>$ uname -a
>CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW64 PCFX166 1.7.10s(0.259/5/3) 20120111 01:45:50 i686
Cygwin
>
>I've done rebaseall and peflagsall.

So I already used teh snapshot of January 11th.

best regards

Heiko



--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple