X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	q=dns; s=default; b=fnoagXLgh62aKAM/QbayAddExnEztxujNbfn1xI14OV
	OA0GNeE39ery5WfK2elugm9H1E9QZE8BF/d8OpFDD8EFsmmOsO0vGFab49sQv1Ag
	Iuf/barcCmK6rbkEdCKu1mr/NHMx7lxHHPEOL+0xtlTozYrGsY27cXtOh0rFKzk0
	=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	s=default; bh=7wc9UAuGVXCk6UxjOwI+RT2pZZ4=; b=UO9zN1I4Bh7h+fnKv
	LbSZQ3oxyvTJ2oLel7gPvMgc1BQBFs9BFGwpRIedVmbDd62eh3tUlDI84zOmwwGv
	ChpBj2aF0VusxUICcGu69deLifabwKzBluidvXNrgWpUgcFcu1d8tKnxpnLiNA5C
	J1ChE14r8tYCwpmBLA4LaV5EJ4=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	smtpout15.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk
X-CTCH-RefID:	str=0001.0A090203.53C7EC4A.011D,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0
X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw:	score=9/97,refid=2.7.2:2014.7.17.120321:17:9.975,ip=,rules=__MOZILLA_MSGID, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __HAS_FROM, __USER_AGENT, __MOZILLA_USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NO_NAME, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __IN_REP_TO, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __TO_IN_SUBJECT, __ANY_URI, URI_ENDS_IN_HTML, __URI_NO_MAILTO, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, __FORWARDED_MSG, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_2000_2999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, __URI_NS, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, TO_IN_SUBJECT, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS
X-CTCH-Spam:	Unknown
Message-ID:	<53C7EC48.5060903@dronecode.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jul 2014 16:31:20 +0100
From:	Jon TURNEY <jon DOT turney AT dronecode DOT org DOT uk>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Core dump on 32-bit Cygwin if program calls dlopen
References:	<53C46ACD DOT 5060601 AT cornell DOT edu> <20140715090259 DOT GB20640 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <53C51460 DOT 5080805 AT cornell DOT edu> <20140715130829 DOT GK10401 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <53C532D9 DOT 7050506 AT gmail DOT com> <20140715143915 DOT GA8330 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20140716070231 DOT GA25020 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <53C6F68A DOT 9000801 AT gmail DOT com> <20140717073734 DOT GA15332 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To:	<20140717073734.GA15332@calimero.vinschen.de>

On 17/07/2014 08:37, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jul 17 06:02, JonY wrote:
>> On 7/16/2014 15:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Jul 15 16:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>> On Jul 15 21:55, JonY wrote:
>>>>> On 7/15/2014 21:08, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FWIW, the problem disappears if I revert gcc-core and libgcc1 to 4.8.2-2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JonY, do you have a chance to have a look into this issue?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I have been busy these few weeks, but I am well aware that there
>>>>> is a problem with one of the libgcc changes, but has yet to investigate it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe Jon Turney has looked into it somewhat.

I think this is the same or a similar problem to the one I reported at 
[1].  I also created a gcc bug [2], with a suggested patch.

>>>> Sounds good.  Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> Yesterday I asked my collegues to take a stab at the issue and one of
>>> them, DJ Delorie, came up with a libgcc patch already.  It hasn't been
>>> sent upstream yet.  Can we give it a try, perhaps by creating a new
>>> libgcc DLL, please?
>>
>> Thanks, I'll get to it this weekend, should I make the new gcc an
>> experimental version? Or is just the libgcc binary required?
>
> It's the libgcc DLL which gives us grief, so a new libgcc package is
> sufficent, afaics.  We should check if this DLL fixes the problem and
> then make it "curr" soon, I think.

I briefly tested this other patch with my test case from the mail above, 
and it doesn't seem to help.

On 15/07/2014 15:45, Jan Nijtmans wrote:
 > Is this essentially the same problem as described here?
 >
 >      <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-05/msg00180.html>

No, I think it is an unforeseen consequence of the patch [3] to fix that 
bug [4], which I believe is present in 4.8.3-1, introducing a new 
problem when an executable which doesn't depend on libgcc dlopen()s a 
dll which does.

[1] https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-07/msg00083.html
[2] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61752
[3] https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2013-07/msg00528.html
[4] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57982


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -