Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/07/11/08:45:20
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 11:50:38PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 08:24:20PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> >But what was wrong with my idea of making rebaseall a #!/bin/ash
> >script?
>
> You still couldn't run the script from bash since the dlls would still
> be loaded. That would mean that you'd have to do something like:
>
> c:\>ash rebaseall
>
> (Currently rebaseall won't work as an ash script but the fix is
> trivial)
>
> I guess that's better than nothing but I still think that just not
> rebasing the bash dlls is going to result in fewer mailing list
> complaints.
My inclination is to convert rebaseall to an ash script.
> OTOH, if we had some coordination between the maintainers of DLLs in
> the distribution we could reduce the need for rebase a lot. I don't
> know if using --enable-auto-image-base would fix every problem but I
> suspect that it might help.
It will, but I have empirical evidence that DLLs need to be rebased with
some padding between them to guarantee that fork() does not fail.
Jason
--
PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers
Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -