Mail Archives: cygwin/2011/11/08/06:22:31
> Mark Geisert (that's me) wrote:
> > I haven't yet diff'd the two cygchecks
> > you sent but maybe that'll lead somewhere.
>
> I've now done that. The 'good' cygcheck shows many more packages installed than
> the 'bad' cygcheck. But the only package version differences I found were for
> bzr, find and mercurial; the 'good' cygcheck paradoxically shows earlier
> versions for those three packages. Hard to see how those package differences
> could matter though.
>
> About the only thing I can think of, and it's a crazy idea, is that the 'good'
> environment, with more packages installed, is somehow supplying something that's
> emulated badly in the 'bad' environment. Figuring out if that's the case would
> involve building your executable with every possible "verbose" switch turned on
> so you can identify exactly where every item going into the executable is coming
> from. Repeated in both 'good' and 'bad' environments.
>
> Or, you could take heart that you've got a good build you can work with now and
> just run with that. Maybe somebody else has another approach to try.
> HTH,
>
> ..mark
>
Yes, the 'good' installation was done Oct. 3 with many more packages
than the bad one. Just a week ago I wanted to install cygwin and run my
software on other machines, and then I ran into this problem. It's not a
paradox that the good installation has earlier package versions since it
was installed a month earlier than the bad one :)
So, my problem is now to isolate what has changed since then, which is
affecting the build of my fortran binary.
There is one thing I remember that is different now when I install a
required library (grib-api, see post
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2011-10/msg00037.html)
I did not experience this hang back one month ago, but I've upgraded gcc
since then, and I wonder if the grib_api, and then my software, is
affected by this.
I will try to rebuild everything with gcc 4.3.4 too se if it helps, and
report the result to the list.
Cheers
- Raw text -