This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: YA call for snapshot testing

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'll investigate that.

>> >>> If not, install the rebase package and
>> >>> read its README to get the proper procedure for running rebaseall.  This
>> >>> is a classic error message indicating colliding DLL addresses.  Rebaseall
>> >>> (and sometimes peflags) are the prescribed solution in these cases.
>> >>> 
>> >>> If that doesn't solve the problem, a complete problem report would be
>> >>> helpful.
>> >
>> >I have no idea how to make a reproducible test case of my system,
>> >composed of 50+ repos, is large and not open source.  We have shell
>> >scripts that we use to apply git commands to each repo.
>> >
>> >One thing I've mentioned before: the problem became much worse when we
>> >switched development to a 16-core machine.  It's running Server 2008
>> >R2.
>> >
>> >Does anyone at Red Hat run on such a large-core machine?
>> Why does that matter?  This is a free software project staffed by one
>> Red Hat person and a lot of people from other institutions.

I'm really not sure what you're getting at...  I was merely asking if
the developers of Cygwin have tested on a 16-core machine.  I think my
problems all started when I and my developers started using it.

>> >The machine has been memtested, btw, and msysgit on the exact same
>> >repos operates flawlessly, in my tests so far.  All other non-cygwin
>> >software on the machine works perfectly, too.
>> >
>> >If you think a bug report without a reproducible test case would be
>> >useful, let me know what info I can provide.
>> Hmm.  Can you actually conceive of a situation where, when reporting a
>> bug, a reproducible test case is NOT useful?

No, but I'm not a Cygwin expert, so I thought I'd ask.

>> Barring a reproducible test case you could provide some of the
>> information that I asked for in the thread that you're responding to.
>> And, we always want to see cygcheck output with the additional details
>> asked for.

I'll read over the thread again and post it shortly.


Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]