Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-23 Thread Brian Dessent
Christopher Faylor wrote: After poking at this a little, I think it would be better to issue a linux-like error message. In my sandbox, I now have this: bash-3.2$ ./libtest /cygdrive/s/test/libtest.exe: error while loading shared libraries: liba.dll: cannot open shared object file: No

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-23 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 01:48:15PM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: After poking at this a little, I think it would be better to issue a linux-like error message. In my sandbox, I now have this: bash-3.2$ ./libtest /cygdrive/s/test/libtest.exe: error while loading shared

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-23 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 08:09:06PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 01:48:15PM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: After poking at this a little, I think it would be better to issue a linux-like error message. In my sandbox, I now have this: bash-3.2$

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-22 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:11:43PM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: That was going to be my first observation, actually. I'm still trying to digest the patch but it seems like it wouldn't work well with the fork retry code. The patch doesn't change any behavior though: in

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-22 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 04:08:46AM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote: Brian Dessent wrote: isn't present, etc. I was really hoping to figure out a cool way to get that info, perhaps by poking around in the TEB or PEB somewhere, but I haven't gotten that far. If anyone has any general ideas where to

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-15 Thread Brian Dessent
Christopher Faylor wrote: That was going to be my first observation, actually. I'm still trying to digest the patch but it seems like it wouldn't work well with the fork retry code. The patch doesn't change any behavior though: in current Cygwin if the thing we're exec()ing returns a Win32

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-14 Thread Brian Dessent
Brian Dessent wrote: isn't present, etc. I was really hoping to figure out a cool way to get that info, perhaps by poking around in the TEB or PEB somewhere, but I haven't gotten that far. If anyone has any general ideas where to look for NTLDR's internal state, I'm all ears. I have a

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 14 04:08, Brian Dessent wrote: Brian Dessent wrote: isn't present, etc. I was really hoping to figure out a cool way to get that info, perhaps by poking around in the TEB or PEB somewhere, but I haven't gotten that far. If anyone has any general ideas where to look for NTLDR's

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-14 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 07:46:37PM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote: Brian Dessent wrote: As we all know, Cygwin calls SetErrorMode (SEM_FAILCRITICALERRORS) to suppress those pop up GUI messageboxes from the operating system when Oh, I forgot to mention: In the course of testing this I came to

[patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-13 Thread Brian Dessent
As we all know, Cygwin calls SetErrorMode (SEM_FAILCRITICALERRORS) to suppress those pop up GUI messageboxes from the operating system when a process encounters an unhandled exception. This has the advantage of making things more POSIX-like, and I'm sure people that run long testsuites or

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-13 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Brian Dessent on 3/13/2008 7:45 PM: | Anyway, the attached patch fixes all that by adding logic to let the | actual NTSTATUS logic percolate up to the waiting parent, so that it can | recognise these kinds of common(ish) faults and print

Re: [patch] recognise when an exec()d process terminates due to unhandled exception

2008-03-13 Thread Brian Dessent
Eric Blake wrote: Should we also mention 'cygcheck ./dll_not_found' to find out which ones are missing? It might be a good idea. On the other hand it's kind of long already. I'm totally not married to what I've got for the wording though, consider it a very rough draft. |