X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:51:29 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: YA call for snapshot testing Message-ID: <20120125085129.GR2456@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20120122055300 DOT GB657 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1BBB0F DOT 2020009 AT gmail DOT com> <20120122165705 DOT GA10996 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1C5F56 DOT 8070208 AT gmail DOT com> <20120122193306 DOT GA12886 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1C759D DOT 9010704 AT shaddybaddah DOT name> <29235 DOT 1327446059 AT freon DOT franz DOT com> <4F1F422E DOT 9040507 AT cygwin DOT com> <13884 DOT 1327471385 AT freon DOT franz DOT com> <20120125062835 DOT GD18425 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120125062835.GD18425@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Jan 25 01:28, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:03:05PM -0800, Kevin Layer wrote: > >Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: > > > >>> > This problem is killing me. I'm currently looking msysgit + GnuWin32 > >>> > because I just can't take the crashes of bash.exe and git.exe anymore. > >>> > In my testing, so far, I've never seen msysgit or the bash that comes > >>> > with it crash. Why is it that cygwin has this problem but msysgit > >>> > does not? It's an honest question and I'm not trying to be > >>> > provocative. I've been a cygwin user since before Red Hat acquired > >>> > them, and the above statement makes me really sad. > >>> > >>> Have you tried running rebaseall? > > > >Absolutely. After updating cygwin, I reboot and run rebaseall -v > >first thing. > > FYI, as far as I can tell the stack trace that you provided did not seem > to come from the 20120123 snapshot. I concur. This: 7 [main] bash 1732 c:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe: *** fatal error - couldn't allo cate heap, Win32 error 487, base 0x990000, top 0x9F0000, reserve_size 389120, allocsize 393216, page_const 4096 looks suspiciously like from 1.7.9 or a snapshot before 2011-05-16. After that, Cygwin allocates the heap by default in a totally different spot, 0x20000000. And if that doesn't work, it will move the heap position *up* in the process VM, not down. And only if there is no continuous memory block of 384K beyond 0x20000000 at process start, which is pretty unlikely, it will allocate a stack of 4 Megs at a spot which the OS decides about. Therefore, a snapshot after 2011-05-16 which tries to allocate 384 Megs in a spot below 0x20000000 is practically impossible. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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