-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 11:25 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
[...]
Anyhow, just to let you know. If you're happy tidying
up and refining the patch
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 06:47:35AM -0400, Tillman, James wrote:
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 06:47:35AM -0400, Tillman, James wrote:
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
I can't quite
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
jw schultz wrote:
I've attached an altered patch. I've only dealt with this
one location which produced errors doing a ssh pull.
OK, I created a test package with your patch included, so that anyone
willing to test but not wililng to compile can use
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 03:52:59AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
There is a huge window between the write() and the return of
waitpid() that depending on scheduling and signal delivery
allows the child pid to be reaped by SIGCHILD handler. That
results in this waitpid() returning -1 with errno of
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 11:42:52PM +0900, Anthony Heading wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 03:52:59AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
There is a huge window between the write() and the return of
waitpid() that depending on scheduling and signal delivery
allows the child pid to be reaped by SIGCHILD
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 06:47:35AM -0400, Tillman, James wrote:
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
I can't quite
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 05:49:45PM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 11:12:29PM +0900, Anthony Heading wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 04:54:22AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
Could you regenerate the patch with diff -u please?
Okay, sure. This one against current CVS.
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
I can't quite place why but my instincts inform me that you
have latched onto something
, 2003 6:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 06:47:35AM -0400, Tillman, James wrote:
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 5:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PATCH/RFC: Another stab at the Cygwin hang problem
I can't quite
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 04:54:22AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
Could you regenerate the patch with diff -u please?
Okay, sure. This one against current CVS.
Anthony
--- cleanup.c.Orig 2003-06-30 22:42:16.0 +0900
+++ cleanup.c 2003-06-30 22:42:47.0 +0900
@@ -96,7 +96,6 @@
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 11:12:29PM +0900, Anthony Heading wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 04:54:22AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
Could you regenerate the patch with diff -u please?
Okay, sure. This one against current CVS.
Thanks that helps in examining it.
I can't quite place why but my
13 matches
Mail list logo
