Brian Dessent wrote: > David Dindorp wrote: >> Uhm. No it's not.. >> Bash 2.05b is so unstable under Cygwin that it classifies as a >> volatile chemical. At least if you put it under a lot of pressure - >> a normal users everyday use it may cope fine with, which is probably >> how it's used by most people in here anyway. >> >> To be fair, this is probably more a Cygwin DLL problem than a bash >> problem, or perhaps a "bash hasn't kept up with changes in Cygwin >> because the maintainer haven't had the time" problem. It's running >> quite stable under 1.5.10, it sucks with 1.5.12 and 1.5.13 and any >> of the latest snapshots.. (Haven't tried 1.5.11, but I will as soon >> as I get the time.) > > I would say it's probably got to do more with changes in the cygwin DLL > than bash. There's the PID reuse issue that has a workaround in the -17 > package by Pierre's patch, and the // thing that Corinna mentioned.
Just for reference, I'm also referring to -17. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/