This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: 1.3.2 : Fork + Sleep = problem
I see. Thanks for the additional explanation.
-Tak
On 2001年7月11日 18:51:51 +0200, Corinna Vinschen <cygwin@cygwin.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 08:01:13AM -0700, Tak Ota wrote:
> > On 2001年7月11日 13:19:06 +0200, Corinna Vinschen <cygwin@cygwin.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Since you only fork() but never wait(), your children processes
> > > become zombies. The zombie list per process is fixed to ... 64 entries.
> >
> > Then why doesn't fork() start returning -1 when the number of zombie
> > reaches maximum count? And why does sleep get affected by this?
>
> Since that's the flaw in Cygwin I mentioned. The effect to sleep() was
> basically due to writing over an array boundary which has reproducably
> hit another signal related variable.
>
> Unfortunately you'll have to wait for 1.3.3 or take a developers
> snapshot to get the fixed behaviour.
>
> Corinna
>
> --
> Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
> Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
> Red Hat, Inc.
>
> --
> Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/