From 4070acc574dce41f6a98848a66626b26be4cdf8c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alexey Sokolov <sokolov@google.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 19:42:15 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Mention 64-bit Cygwin as another remedy for fork() failures.

---
 winsup/doc/faq-using.xml | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/winsup/doc/faq-using.xml b/winsup/doc/faq-using.xml
index ae72145..f6d4b8e 100644
--- a/winsup/doc/faq-using.xml
+++ b/winsup/doc/faq-using.xml
@@ -1394,13 +1394,15 @@ such as virtual memory paging and file caching.</para>
   <para><itemizedlist>
     <listitem>Restart whatever process is trying (and failing) to use
     <literal>fork()</literal>. Sometimes Windows sets up a process
-    environment that is even more hostile to fork() than usual.</listitem>
+    environment that is even more hostile to <literal>fork()</literal> than usual.</listitem>
     <listitem>Ensure that you have eliminated (not just disabled) all
     software on the <xref linkend="faq.using.bloda"/>.
     </listitem>
     <listitem>Read the 'rebase' package README in
     <literal>/usr/share/doc/rebase/</literal>, and follow the
     instructions there to run 'rebaseall'.</listitem>
+    <listitem>Switch from 32-bit Cygwin to 64-bit Cygwin, if your OS and CPU support that.
+    With the bigger address space <literal>fork()</literal> is less likely to fail.</listitem>
     </itemizedlist></para>
   <para>Please note that installing new packages or updating existing
   ones undoes the effects of rebaseall and often causes fork() failures
-- 
2.6.2