[1.7] Updated: cygwin-1.7.0-65

[Huang Bambo]

2009/11/23 Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>:
> On Nov 23 17:43, Huang Bambo wrote:
>> 2009/11/23 Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>:
>> > On Nov 22 09:33, Huang Bambo wrote:
>> >> And there's another quesiton:
>> >> The handle of chile process( created by fork ) seems never been closed
>> >> bye parent process. Is it need to be closed?
>> >
>> > I don't understand the question.  There's one dangling socket handle left
>> > and I know where and why it happens.  Other than that, I don't see any
>> > other socket handling which is left open accidentally.
>> >
>> While run my last test code, every time comes one connection, there
>> are 3 handle leak( I monited it by Process Explorer( from
>> www.sysinternals.com)), one is the chile process's handle, one is of
>> "Section      \BaseNamedObjects\cygwin1S5-9770bb4ddbd85dca\cygpid.xxxx",
>> the other one is of \Device\Afd.
>> I mean is there any other leak with those handles.
>
> The leak is a result of the parent process not calling wait(2) or
> waitpid(2) to reap the child process.  If you let the process properly
> call wait/waitpid, you won't see a leak, except for the current socket
> leak this thread is about.

There's some diffirence between cygwin and other *nix:
In other *nix with this condition, those ended child process could be
list by ps command with <defunc>tag, will you fix it?

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple