This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: bug in ash (Was: State of the DLL, mark 2?)
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com, cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Subject: Re: bug in ash (Was: State of the DLL, mark 2?)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:51:23 -0500
- References: <20010319203650.A30559@redhat.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20010320091254.F32706@redhat.com> <email@example.com> <20010320101715.K32706@redhat.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20010322161241.A18144@redhat.com> <20010326113543.A1725@cygbert.vinschen.de>
- Reply-To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 11:35:43AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 04:12:41PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 11:52:24PM +0300, Egor Duda wrote:
>> >well, i've found the reason. moreover, i've found that as was once
>> >patched to fix this bug, but later, patch was reverted. i wonder why.
>> >did it have some ill side effects?
>> Hmm. I vaguely remember this. I remember asking Corinna to look into
>> this but neither of us had an actual test case that tickled the bug.
>> I can't find any email from Corinna explaining why the bug was backed
>> out but I wonder if I asked her to do this in a phone call or something.
>Correct. I have applied that patch but I never found the bug itself
>so Chris asked me to back out the patch again due to a patch for an
>unknown bug is somewhat weird.
>> I will wait for Corinna to come back from holiday so that she can offer
>> the definitive opinion, though.
>I will reapply Andy's patch again.
Thanks. I'm glad to find out that this fixes a problem. It sounds like
Andy's solution is the correct one, too.
Out of curiousity, did anyone check any of the *BSD sources to see if
this had been fixed there?