Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/12/26/12:21:46
On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 02:38:03PM +0000, Max Bowsher wrote:
>Linda Walsh wrote:
>> The fix I proposed has nothing to do with the cygwin1.dll. As has
>> been covered previously, since cygwin1.dll and a few other libs are
>> part of the cygwin "kernel", special handling may be needed to upgrade
>> those dll's. What can be fixed is the installation of .exe and .dll
>> files for
>> applications. The behavior of those should be the same as replacing
>> in-use .so's and executables on *nix.
>
>I believe there is a critical element you have missed.
>
>In order to perform the rather miraculous emulation of fork(), Cygwin
>needs to reload all the same DLLs that are operating in one process into
>another newly created process. Updating the DLL files on disk whilst
>processes are using them prevents this from happening.
>
>For a simple demonstration of this:
>
>* Start a bash shell
>* Rename any of the DLLs used by bash to something else
>* Try to execute any non-builtin command
>* See the fork failure message
>
>Could this be worked around? Perhaps.
>Is it likely to happen? No, the benefit-to-work ratio is too low.
Thanks for adding a piece of the puzzle, Max.
This is a reason why just renaming an in-use dll is not going to work
and creation of .new files is required.
cgf
--
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 -