On Jul 29 09:35, Ryan Johnson wrote: > http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#TOFU > > On 29/07/2013 8:15 AM, Ariel Burbaickij wrote: > >OK, thank, you, so usual suspects. Now, removing, antivirus and stuff > >will not be possible in this particular environment but adjustments in > >the configuration are well possible, provided I will be able to prove > >to administrators that troubles, indeed, stem from antivirus and co. > >Now, I see in the FAQ in 4.42 section that these troubles were traced > >and attributed to antiviri programs. Any more details about how they > >were traced exactly, so that I can re-trace them too and provide a > >proof, if needed? > The proof usually goes something like this: > > 1. People report fork() failures on the list, and a correlation is > noted between those failures and presence of app/antivirus X. > 2. It is confirmed (or at least considered highly probable) that X > performs dll injection, the root cause of these sorts of fork() > failures. > 3. Somebody tries disabling/removing X and the fork() failures go away. > 4. X gets added to BLODA and reports of fork() failures, not > attributable to X, disappear from the list. > > Eventually the process repeats when Y appears.
There's no Y. The successor of X is allegedly called Wayland. <duck> Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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