On 2012-05-25 17:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On May 25 16:52, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On May 25 15:18, Denis Excoffier wrote: >>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 02:54:14PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>>>> On May 25 14:17, Denis Excoffier wrote: >>>>>> 97 6945 [main] date 3440 pinfo::thisproc: myself dwProcessId 3440 >>>>>> 76 7021 [main] date 3440 time: 1337945628 = time(0) >>>>>> --- Process 3440, exception C0000005 at 610DDC3C >>>>>> 1343 8364 [main] date 3440 exception::handle: In >>>>>> cygwin_except_handler exception 0xC0000005 at 0x610DDC3C sp 0x2127F0 >>>>>> 92 8456 [main] date 3440 exception::handle: In >>>>>> cygwin_except_handler signal 11 at 0x610DDC3C >>>>>> 86 8542 [main] date 3440 exception::handle: In >>>>>> cygwin_except_handler calling 0x0 >>>>>> 320 8862 [main] date 3440 >>>>>> D:\Home\dexcoff1\dexcoff1\cyg12e\bin\date.exe: *** fatal error - >>>>>> internal error reading the windows environment - too many environment >>>>>> variables? >>>>> >>>>> Grr. The fault handler covers the actual problem. I'm going to send >>>>> you the URL to a test DLL in a minute via PM, if you don't mind. It has >>>>> the fault handler removed, so instead of the "internal error reading the >>>>> windows environment" error you should see a "real" SEGV, and the crash >>>>> should hopefully produce a more valid stacktrace. That's what I'd be >>>>> interested in. >>> >>> Here are the results: >>> >>> % /usr/bin/strace -o date.trace2 /usr/bin/date >>> 8972 [main] date 716 exception::handle: Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION >>> 10607 [main] date 716 open_stackdumpfile: Dumping stack trace to >>> date.exe.stackdump >>> % cat date.exe.stackdump >>> Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION at eip=610E4BB1 >>> eax=000E000C ebx=611FDA9A ecx=00000020 edx=0022AAC4 esi=60FD0000 >>> edi=61006582 >>> ebp=00212978 esp=002128F0 >>> program=D:\Home\dexcoff1\dexcoff1\cyg12e\bin\date.exe, pid 716, thread main >>> cs=001B ds=0023 es=0023 fs=003B gs=0000 ss=0023 >>> Stack trace: >>> Frame Function Args >>> 00212978 610E4BB1 (00222A91, 611F7FCF, 0022AAC4, 002229F0) >>> 00222A28 610E9092 (611AEA40, 00222A50, 611F8280, 611F7FB8) >>> 0022AA68 610E9270 (611AEA40, 00000040, 611F8280, 611F7FB8) >>> 0022AAA8 610E9421 (611AEA40, 00000040, 611F8280, 611F7FB8) >>> 0022AB08 610C7090 (0022ABE0, 0000074C, 00020019, 0022AB54) >>> 0022AB38 610C6E5A (0022ABE0, 0000074C, 00020019, 611F7FA6) >> >> Bzz. Thank you. One of the debug output statements was broken. >> A struct was given to the debug_printf function by value, but the >> function expects a pointer. Should be fixed now in CVS. > > I just uploaded a new snapshot.
The new snapshot (20120525 17:01:08) ressuscitates strace. Thank you. This probably means that during all these months, all users of strace were Administrators... Regards, Denis Excoffier. -- 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
