Re: sigprocmask issue

2012-12-31 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 05:18:52PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: >I'm reporting this now because gnulib unit tests found a failure in >stock cygwin 1.7.17, but I'm still investigating whether it is a >regression, and/or whether it has been fixed by snapshots. This sounds similar to a problem reported a

Re: sigprocmask issue

2012-12-31 Thread Aaron Schneider
On 01/01/2013 1:59, Eric Blake wrote: Odd. I just noticed that my system is pegged at 100% CPU, attributed to a syslogd process; wonder if severe load is the culprit that violates the timing assumptions in that test. I killed that process, reran the test, and no longer see the failure. I'm won

Re: sigprocmask issue

2012-12-31 Thread Eric Blake
On 12/31/2012 05:30 PM, Aaron Schneider wrote: > On 01/01/2013 1:18, Eric Blake wrote: >> I'm reporting this now because gnulib unit tests found a failure in >> stock cygwin 1.7.17, but I'm still investigating whether it is a >> regression, and/or whether it has been fixed by snapshots. This >> re

Re: sigprocmask issue

2012-12-31 Thread Aaron Schneider
On 01/01/2013 1:18, Eric Blake wrote: I'm reporting this now because gnulib unit tests found a failure in stock cygwin 1.7.17, but I'm still investigating whether it is a regression, and/or whether it has been fixed by snapshots. This relatively simple test case asserts that SIGINT is never deli

sigprocmask issue

2012-12-31 Thread Eric Blake
I'm reporting this now because gnulib unit tests found a failure in stock cygwin 1.7.17, but I'm still investigating whether it is a regression, and/or whether it has been fixed by snapshots. This relatively simple test case asserts that SIGINT is never delivered as required. #include #include