Hello,

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 schrieb:
>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 19:36:51 +0200,
>>>>>> Marco Schumann said:

>
>> I compiled using this patch and without --disable-atomic, unfortunately
>> named refused to start:

>
>> 10-Oct-2006 19:28:22.894 general: rbtdb.c:1128: INSIST(((unsigned
>> int)((&rbtdb->node_locks[node->locknum].references)->ref
>> s))) failed
>> 10-Oct-2006 19:28:22.894 general: exiting (due to assertion failure)

>
> ...
>
> But the actual behavior of these two patches should be the same...do
> you mean named exited during initialization by 'refused to start'? Or
> do you mean it existed just after starting? In any case, if it dumped
> core, backtrace (of all threads) would be helpful as before.


just to let you know, bind exited with return code 6 right after starting.

Kind regards
--
_____________________________
[Marco Schumann