From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12125 invoked by alias); 19 May 2011 15:32:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 12114 invoked by uid 22791); 19 May 2011 15:32:26 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,TW_SV X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nm18-vm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (HELO nm18-vm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com) (98.138.91.64) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Thu, 19 May 2011 15:32:10 +0000 Received: from [98.138.90.56] by nm18.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 May 2011 15:32:08 -0000 Received: from [98.138.226.128] by tm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 May 2011 15:32:08 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp215.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 May 2011 15:32:08 -0000 Received: from [192.168.1.231] (reply-to-list-only-lh@108.7.36.4 with plain) by smtp215.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 May 2011 08:32:08 -0700 PDT X-Yahoo-SMTP: Uu383n6swBCEN1G9up0WSnxbvN8fCPmk Message-ID: <4DD537F7.4010901@cygwin.com> Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 15:32:00 -0000 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.10 ThunderBrowse/3.3.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Repeated problems with svn even after rebaseall and peflagsall on Windows 7 References: <20110517011110.GA22552@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <688D8B269DCBDE44A466DC43D403624C0155CCFE40@pfi-mail> In-Reply-To: <688D8B269DCBDE44A466DC43D403624C0155CCFE40@pfi-mail> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00278.txt.bz2 On 5/19/2011 11:25 AM, Mike Dahmus wrote: > Nope, didn't help; in fact, the rebase at 0x77000000 (whatever the > recommendation was) broke things much worse; and now even bash won't start > without a million access violations. > > Why is this even necessary anyways? Other than "because it's always been > this way"? I've been as stalwart a defender of cygwin as you'd find at my > various companies over the years but this wart is getting really hard to > ignore. In particular, since I myself can't do subversion or various other > things any more without devolving to something like (ugh) tortoise. Short answer: It's an artifact of emulating fork on Windows. Long answer: See the email archives for all the discussions about it and attempts to make this less painful. You may find that limiting the number of packages/DLLs installed helps. -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- 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