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]

RE: W7 and rebase [was "YA call for snapshot testing"]


marco atzeri sent the following at Monday, January 30, 2012 3:20 PM
>On 1/26/2012 1:07 PM, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
>> marco atzeri sent the following at Friday, January 20, 2012 3:49 AM
>>> my 2c$ : As rebaseall is almost mandatory on W7/64 and we are always
>>> suggesting it to anyone with fork problem,
>>
>> My box was upgraded from XP Pro to W7 a couple of months ago.  At the
>> beginning I was getting fork errors all the time when running scripts.
>> It eventually went away (mostly*), though I don't remember whether it
>> was as a result of something that knowingly did I did.
>>
>> (* It is now rare enough to not be a problem in practice.  I'll kill
>> the script and start over.)
>>
>> The old guidance was that one shouldn't rebase unless one is told to.
>> My question is whether that has changed.  Is it now, "rebase if you
>> have W7"?
>
>Hi Barry, my guidance is rebasesall if you have fork errors.
>
>My personal experience is that W7/64 is much more prone to such issue
>than previous XP/32

Since I don't remember seeing the fork errors for a while - but would
prefer to never see them ever again - is there any risk to running
rebaseall?  I'm concerned with "The old guidance was that one shouldn't
rebase unless one is told to."  Is it different on W7?

Thanks for your help,

- Barry
  Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID.


--
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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]