This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Charles, > This means that very first call to the cygwin1.dll function 'write(int > networkSocketFd, const void *buf, size_t nbyte)' failed for some > reason: ENOBUFS is not one of the valid error codes for write(), so > it's set to that by something internal to cygwin's implementation of > write(). Ok. Having re-read my original mail I probably should have made clear that it works fine for smaller files (I've tried 10, 15MB files with no problems at all) - don't know if that makes a difference, but to my untrained eye I'd be surprised if the difference in file size caused a problem with the socket opening... > e.g. smells like a cygwin (or windows) bug -- cygwin is unable to > create a Mutex or an Event for managing the socket communications > (e.g. CreateMutex or CreateEvent in net.cc: > (handler_socket::init_events) failed) > > I'm wondering if you have different versions of cygwin on the > two machines -- not that it should matter, but if so then the > answer may be simple. Can you send -- as attachments, not > cut-n-paste -- the result of 'cygcheck -s -v -r' on each of > the two cygwin machines? Attached (I hope). xp-ant1 is running inetutils 1.5, xp-ant2 1.3.2. Ant.
Attachment:
xp-ant1.txt
Description: Text document
Attachment:
xp-ant2.txt
Description: Text document
-- 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/
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |