Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-Id:	<200001100409.WAA19238@hp2.xraylith.wisc.edu>
To:	Kazuhiro Fujieda <fujieda AT jaist DOT ac DOT jp>
cc:	cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject:	Re: binutils snapshot -- problems?
In-reply-to:	Your message of "10 Jan 2000 11:07:15 +0900."
	<s1sn1qed6i4 DOT fsf AT jaist DOT ac DOT jp>
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2000 22:09:43 -0600
From:	Mumit Khan <khan AT NanoTech DOT Wisc DOT EDU>

Kazuhiro Fujieda <fujieda AT jaist DOT ac DOT jp> writes:
> I tested binutils-19990911-cygb20.tar.gz on Win95 OSR 2.1.
> 
> $ gcc --version
> 2.95.2
> $ `gcc -print-prog-name=ld` --version | head -1
> GNU ld 2.9-19990911
> $ `gcc -print-prog-name=as` --version | head -1
> GNU assembler 2.9-19990911

Thanks. It's good to do these sanity checks.

> $ objdump -h new-cygwin1.dll
> 
> new-cygwin1.dll:     file format pei-i386
> 
> Sections:
> Idx Name          Size      VMA       LMA       File off  Algn
>   0 .text         00071000  61001000  61001000  00000400  2**2
>                   CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, READONLY, CODE
>   1 .data         00007200  61072000  61072000  00071400  2**2
>                   CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, CODE, DATA

Interesting that this runs (the unstripped version), since the section
flags to .data section is wrong, and that's what is causing the problem
after stripping it.

Believe it or not, I still can't reproduce this behaviour, and so I'm
downloading everything from my site and using the same tools you and
Corinna are using on a native Win98 box (yuk!). More later.

If I can't fix this soon (ie., in a day or so), I'll roll back to my
old trusted 1999-08-08 + and apply local patches.

Thanks for testing these out. I'd rather get the bad news *now* than
later.

Regards,
Mumit

- Raw text -