Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/10/16/16:32:29
<flame on>
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 01:47:20PM -0500, Wayne Willcox wrote:
>
>>On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 02:44:54PM -0400, Thomas Chadwick wrote:
>>
>>>Problem Synopsis:
>>>
>>>After updating my existing Cygwin/Xfree86 install with Cygwin's
>>>Setup.exe, I launched XFree86 and tried to bring up an xterm. However,
>>>I got an error that said, to the effect, "cannot find cygncurses5.dll".
>>>A little poking around made it apparent that the "upgrade"
Oh yeah -- gotta love those sarcasm quotation marks. Yeah, I spent
several hours -- actually most of a weekend -- creating the new
package(s). I solicited comments before and after from the cygwin-apps
list for several weeks. I did all this so that I could break your
installation with a faux "upgrade".
It's not an "upgrade". It is an *upgrade*. Most of the improvements
are not user-visible -- but are incremental towards getting ncurses to
build *as a dll* OOB. The previous version differed from the official
release by a 550k patch. This one by only 50k. Better, no? The FSF
people might actually accept this patch...
>>>>blew away the
>>>file /bin/cygncurses5.dll and replaced it with /bin/cygncurses6.dll,
>>>hence breaking the xterm build.
>>>
>>>Problem Fix/Work-Around:
>>>
>>>I found that by simply copying /bin/cygncurses6.dll to
Funny, somebody else already suggesting your workaround, and was told
(by me) that it was the WRONG thing to do.
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2001-10/msg00589.html
Do you honestly think the ncurses maintainer (that is, me) changed the
DLL name on a whim? That if only I had been thinking, I wouldn't have
done that -- and thus the correct fix is to rename it back?
It actually took affirmative effort to change the dll name from ...5 to
...6 -- surely the maintainer (i.e. me) wouldn't do extra work if there
wasn't a good reason...
>>>
>>could you have used a sym link... I would think so.
>>
No. *Windows* searches for DLL's. *Windows* doesn't understand cygwin
symlinks (okay, it sorta does now that they are shortcuts -- but the
windows DLL loader won't follow shortcuts).
Besides, the right thing to do is NOT to trick windows into loading the
cygncurses6.dll instead of the 5.dll it wants. 6 and 5 are *different*.
Note: this is the last time I will respond to any message on this "problem".
--Chuck
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -