This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the cygwin project.
RE: The 20060324/20060326 snapshots hang on testcase
- From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>
- To: "'The Cygwin-Talk Malingering List'" <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:29:18 -0600
- Subject: RE: The 20060324/20060326 snapshots hang on testcase
- Reply-to: The Cygwin-Talk Malingering List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
> From: Dave Korn
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 4:15 AM
> To: Thread TITTTL'd!
> Subject: RE: The 20060324/20060326 snapshots hang on testcase
> On 28 March 2006 06:43, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> Oi Gary! This thread needs TITTTL'ing!
But think of the chickens Dave! Won't somebody think of the chickens?!?!?
> >> From: Dave Korn
> >> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 5:00 AM
> >> To: cygwin@cygwin
> >> Subject: RE: The 20060324/20060326 snapshots hang on testcase
> >> On 27 March 2006 04:04, Volker Quetschke wrote:
> >>> The newest 20060324/20060326 snapshots started to hang on the
> >>> following testcase. Note, I only tried the following versions:
> >>> release 1.5.19 no hang
> >>> snapshot 20060306 no hang
> >>> snapshot 20060324 hangs
> >>> snapshot 20060326 hangs
> >> CVS 20060317: no hang.
> >> [ Just to help refine the search a bit. ]
> > Ahem, without resolution to the minute that's going to help
> how again?
> Why would you need resolution to the minute unless someone
> was making changes in /src/winsup equally frequently? I had
> a data point that was handily in between the 6th and the
> 24th, in fact it was more or less a binary chop of the range
> that had still to be reduced and halved it!
Yeah, to you and me maybe that makes total sense. But to somebody who can
track down and fix a bug he and/or she didn't even know existed PLUS post
two emails about it in less than nineteen minutes, and still thinks that's
too slow, I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT IT IS NOT SIR! Your binary choppery would
have only reduced that to 9.5 minutes - STILL NOT FAST ENOUGH I SAY! Had
you had at least a shred of human decency and had narrowed this chasm of
time down to the minute wherein the issue presented itself, you would have
reduced this post/duplicate/find/fix/post cycle time to:
8 days * 86400 secs/day... Carry the five... One-over...
TWENTY SEVEN MICROSECONDS!
How DARE you sir!
> Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
Gary R. Van Sickle