From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA02212; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 19:52:45 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA02143 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 19:52:44 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from swordfish.cs.caltech.edu (swordfish.cs.caltech.edu [131.215.44.124]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i68HqgSH028836 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 19:52:43 +0200 Received: from [192.168.0.131] (charter-241-136.caltech.edu [131.215.241.136]) by swordfish.cs.caltech.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6090DF27C for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 10:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) In-Reply-To: <20040708150902.GA4191@yquem.inria.fr> References: <20040708150902.GA4191@yquem.inria.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Nathaniel Gray Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OS X: Trouble with threads + execv Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 10:52:50 -0700 To: caml-list@inria.fr X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 40ED89EB.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 threads:01 execv:01 execv:01 otherlibs:01 systhreads:01 posix:01 execvp:01 execve:01 threads:01 posix:01 caml's:01 bug:01 cmxa:01 supported:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Jul 8, 2004, at 8:09 AM, Xavier Leroy wrote: >> I'm seeing some confusing behavior on OS X (10.3.4) relating to >> pthreads and the execv family of calls. It appears that when the >> scheduler thread (from otherlibs/systhreads/thread_posix.ml) is >> running, any call to execv will fail with "Operation not supported." >> The same applies to execvp, execve, and execvpe. >> >> If I build the program without linking to threads.cmxa then it works >> as >> expected. >> Is this expected behavior? > > No. According to POSIX, exec* has no reason to fail if other threads > are still running in the current process. These other threads are > terminated. With system threads, Caml's Unix.exec* functions just > call the corresponding system calls. > > If you want to make sure, you could try to reproduce this behavior > with a small C program. Thanks. I was able to reproduce it with a C program so I'll file a bug report with Apple. Cheers, -Nathan -- >>>-- Nathaniel Gray -- Caltech Computer Science ------> >>>-- Mojave Project -- http://mojave.cs.caltech.edu --> ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners