Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 47210 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2007 23:47:29 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Oct 2007 23:47:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 97017 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2007 23:47:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-stdcxx-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 97002 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2007 23:47:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact stdcxx-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 96991 invoked by uid 99); 30 Oct 2007 23:47:16 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 16:47:16 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.30.140.160] (HELO moroha.quovadx.com) (208.30.140.160) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:47:17 +0000 Received: from [10.70.3.143] ([10.70.3.143]) by moroha.quovadx.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l9UNkRnb030122 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:27 GMT Message-ID: <4727C270.3080409@roguewave.com> Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:46:56 -0600 From: Martin Sebor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.8) Gecko/20071009 SeaMonkey/1.1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: 22.locale.messages hangs on Linux References: <4727B344.1080004@roguewave.com> <13499795.post@talk.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <13499795.post@talk.nabble.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Travis Vitek wrote: > > > Martin Sebor wrote: >> [...] >> >> I wonder if this might be the cause of the problem: >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=576787 >> >> [...] >> >> (Farid, the ChangeLog has your name on it even though the change >> itself was mine. Let it be a reminder to you to give blame where >> blame is due :) >> > > Are you sure? I specifically remember Farid and I trying to convince you > that it needed to be a class guard instead of a static guard. The > conversation is archived at > http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=12680046. That's right, this one is your guys' fault! ;-) I was talking about the other change which I'm to blame for: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=588734 Farid was just nice enough to merge it to trunk for me and in the process replaced my name in the ChangeLog with mine: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=590124 > > It is likely that is actually the problem. As Farid and I agreed, the > functions __rw_manage_cat_data, catopen, catclose, catgets need to use the > same lock. Looks like we need to add a scope to isolate the guard so that > the lock is released before the _RWSTD_REQUIRES(). Something like that. Btw., the deadlock problem here has been an issue before -- see (Rogue Wave only): http://insight.roguewave.com/onyxinsight/qa/qa30046.htm Martin