DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 56TLZ5IG1042309
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 56TLZ5IG1042309
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=dMf+tcp/
X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BEE763858D37
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1753824902;
	bh=pgiW41IzZ1l2erATd+YIC6Gw86SCujim0WH+UreI0pg=;
	h=Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:
	List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:
	From:Reply-To:From;
	b=dMf+tcp/onMdNHEgF2ahAmTT0WMUGsnBAuT00FvJojLN3cX4SsQp3jaM0kPAMbVLW
	63ee0ozVz2HOW/bBYqgbtrLh+ISYS39eO+zR57HigbP2oaIVRl9mqSwNC/swzvx9uS
	RF/GHeL/GetdYCERxGSf+fht7zjrqJpWcBMwhths=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org B57823858D26
ARC-Filter:	OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org B57823858D26
ARC-Seal:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1753824840; cv=none;
	b=lsP0sDZu59GGxh8pZu9JwaMoeBSotQm/S5BpQGl3SQHqAlRMXQL6vvqbMOuwDRfoFP8qRByvc4lbAp3P9jCeLJKHNWN3K7u8xpswulAgVUlDhBA8FcuyCz9IvvadHWTAaoLTjpYz/cApHUKG+dIziiRpjmCqjsOzuIv4fpq53xA=
ARC-Message-Signature:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
	t=1753824840; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=55IT7tNymzDycMdTRULUQdHSNwgmQwduzQ1TaSKjvNQ=;
	h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version;
	b=M73k6Cfzh67YA6D2YUP7b5DfzSe1kgjPadt/QmzDe+rd/NsZ4nSZNZrYy9zIN9/iAne9iX2ZGc7ZEP45fSWgy1XPsqd3aqgbUGXJKSr8kZrCbBBv+ciNlNjxUCszcNTqjYXwSL8BYOstExQ2mFEHxaW4XWguLUmoImBY726et/o=
ARC-Authentication-Results:	i=1; server2.sourceware.org
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B57823858D26
Date:	Tue, 29 Jul 2025 14:34:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-X-Sender:	jeremyd AT resin DOT csoft DOT net
To:	Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
cc:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: new c++ new/delete overloads need wrapping?
In-Reply-To:	<ba3639bf-1286-4a97-583b-42ee7e61cecb@jdrake.com>
Message-ID:	<2786ab8c-11a7-b1e4-59a0-02f567b3f368@jdrake.com>
References:	<81535510-8360-1c72-442a-0b630a6d937f AT jdrake DOT com>
	<aINAAW2oh-EfgP0V AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
	<d2b0c82b-7390-7efe-789f-8d11120ec12a AT jdrake DOT com>
	<aIdBw5iSaIonAPbI AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
	<80497791-d323-4204-66ef-4b1a8ff45aa9 AT jdrake DOT com>
	<aIiItsyRODNPeqez AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
	<ba3639bf-1286-4a97-583b-42ee7e61cecb AT jdrake DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Jeremy Drake via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	Jeremy Drake <cygwin AT jdrake DOT com>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2025, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
>
> > On Jul 28 12:57, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:
> > > On Mon, 28 Jul 2025, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> > > > Unless there's some automatism referencing the __wrap_X functions even
> > > > if the --wrap option isn't present, I don't see this incompatibility as
> > > > much of a problem.  We're trying to maintain backward compat, but that
> > > > doesn't mean an executable created under  and for a newer Cygwin DLL
> > > > has to run under an older DLL.
> > >
> > > OK, then the patch adds support for wrapping these functions ends up in a
> > > stable Cygwin release, then GCC is updated to add additional --wrap
> > > parameters for them, and that GCC and binaries it produces will no longer
> > > be compatible with older Cygwin DLLs.
> >
> > *iff* the --wrap option is used with functions not provided by older
> > DLLs, right?  Not for some reason generally incompatible, I hope...
>
> Correct.  However, I expect that to be very common for C++ binaries,
> because it seems like the C++14 sized delete is now used by default for
> ordinary (non-array) delete.

Oh, and you know what else uses these symbols... libstdc++-6.dll.
And the larger cygwin_cxx_malloc struct will mean that binaries that try
to fill it out will need a newer DLL version with the larger struct
(libstdc++-6.dll being notable there as it provides the implementations
generally).

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

- Raw text -