Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/02/28/15:29:16
On Feb 28 14:51, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 01:47:16PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> If so, I'm wondering if setting the TS-aware flag shouldn't become
> >> default in GCC. What do you say, Dave? Would that be possible?
> >
> >I'd probably wait on that for the /next/ release (e.g. after 4.3.2-2),
> >[...]
> >Maybe the aslr functionality is different enough -- and useful in enough
> >contexts that differ from rebasing -- that instead of incorporating
> >'call aslr TOO' into rebaseall, there should be a separate 'aslrall' script?
>
> It should be trivial to add this to binutils. Doesn't it ultimately
> belong in ld and (maybe) objcopy?
Yes, that should be done in ld.
> I can add this now but I don't think it should be the default just yet.
If the TS-aware flag actually helps to avoid the tsappcmp.dll bug, then
I think the flag should be set by ld by default for Cygwin apps.
> >That would be nice. However, ONLY exe's linked with cygwin1.dll should
> >be marked this way, right? Not cygcheck, strace, and whatever other few
> >exes we might find in the cygwin installation lists.
>
> Do the exes themselves need this bit as well as the dlls?
Only exes require the TS-aware bit. Two interesting snippets from MSDN:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc834995(VS.85).aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/01cfys9z.aspx
The first one actually explains that the overhead of loading a
compatibility DLL can be avoided by using the TS-aware flag.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
--
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 -