X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4473CF07.9090201@kleckner.net> Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 20:12:07 -0700 From: Jim Kleckner User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051230) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: 1.15.19 dlopen() dies with no dlerror() References: <4472AF3B.2050300@kleckner.net> <4473B387.2020905@kleckner.net> <4473C5C9.50104@cygwin.com> In-Reply-To: <4473C5C9.50104@cygwin.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: > Jim Kleckner wrote: >> Jim Kleckner wrote: >>> Michael McKerns wrote: >>>> Yes, yes... I've not given you enough information... >>>> ... >>>> See: >>>> http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/dll.html >>>> http://cygwin.com/faq.html#faq.programming.dll-relocatable >>>> >>> I'm seeing a similar problem with python and 1.5.19 and also tried >>> the snapshot of 22-May. >>> >>> CYGWIN_NT-5.1 kleckner2 1.5.20s(0.155/4/2) 20060522 00:51:23 i686 >>> Cygwin >>> >>> A simple test case doesn't fail in dlopen(). >>> >>> My code is not simple but has been working prior to the most recent >>> update (which also updated python and other packages). >>> A downrev of python does not make the problem go away. If I downrev >>> cygwin, I get complaints about missing entry points. >>> >>> What do you recommend as the best way to isolate this? >> >> I tried using "prev" with setup.exe but that didn't make the problem >> go away. >> >> A simple test case with python access to a trivial function works >> fine (can supply if anyone wants). >> The complex dll that used to work simply doesn't return from dlopen. >> >> I downloaded the 20060522 snapshot with debug symbols to get a >> backtrace with GDB. >> GDB says there is a seg fault and somehow this is preventing any >> information from reaching dlerror(). >> Without the dlerror() info, it is hard to figure out what needs to >> change with the dll. >> It appears that some constructors are having trouble. >> >> Let me know if there is some single stepping that could be helpful. >> [snip] >> (gdb) bt >> #0 0x610b1ff8 in pthread_key_create (key=0x6622f8, destructor=0) at > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Known issue already fixed in the Cygwin snapshot and in GDB's CVS. This > is not fatal. Just continue until you stop seeing this complaint. > As noted above, this was tested using snapshot 20060522. Should that snapshot have the fix you mention? If it should, then this problem still exists in that snapshot. If not, then which one should I test? Thanks - Jim -- 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/