Re: process_easy: DuplicateHandle(In) failed (e=6)

[J. Grant]

on the 01/04/04 20:59, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: "twk" <address@hidden>
> > Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 09:23:01 -0500
> >
> > I do not understand, though, why the version of cygwin would
> > have any influence on make's behavior when the make was
> > built native.
>
> Presumably because Bash uses the Cygwin libraries and somehow screws
> up file handle duplication.

Is e=6 ERROR_INVALID_HANDLE?  If you can replicate you can find out
exactly what the string is using the FormatMessage() change in the
attached patch.  Perhaps these error codes could be decoded into
meaningful strings? (For all of these e=%d style error messages.)


Regards

JG

--- sub_proc.c  2004-04-01 23:56:29.000000000 +0100
+++ sub_proc.c.orig     2004-04-01 23:36:52.000000000 +0100
@@ -1159,21 +1159,9 @@
                       0,
                       TRUE,
                       DUPLICATE_SAME_ACCESS) == FALSE) {
-    LPVOID error_string;
-    DWORD error_code = GetLastError();
-    DWORD format_string_code = FormatMessage(
-            FORMAT_MESSAGE_ALLOCATE_BUFFER |
-            FORMAT_MESSAGE_FROM_SYSTEM |
-            FORMAT_MESSAGE_IGNORE_INSERTS,
-            NULL, error_code,
-            MAKELANGID(LANG_NEUTRAL, SUBLANG_DEFAULT),
-            (LPTSTR) &error_string, 0, NULL);
-
     fprintf(stderr,
-            "process_easy: DuplicateHandle(In) failed (e=%d, '%s')\n",
-            error_code, error_string);
-    LocalFree(error_string);
-
+            "process_easy: DuplicateHandle(In) failed (e=%d)\n",
+            GetLastError());
     return INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE;
   }
   if (DuplicateHandle(GetCurrentProcess(),