X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:58:38 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin Python/PIL TCL/TK fork rebase solution Message-ID: <20070116175838.GB14405@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <87ejpvluvj.fsf@superfluity.lefae.org> <3D1F5241A4BA56B7EBA1D30B@qjunbur.quns.cam.ac.uk> <45ACC59F.397A6589@dessent.net> <45ACCBEF.49170261@dessent.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:50:06PM +0000, Robin Walker wrote: >For this to be the problem it appears to be, I'm guessing that there must >be some shortcoming in the Windows APIs in this area when compared with >facilities available within other Posix-compliant OSs. It isn't a shortcoming at all. Windows is perfectly within its rights to put DLLs whereever it wants. Windows doesn't implement fork() so it doesn't have to worry about creating a new process whose addresss space is a carbon copy of another process. >How does Linux deal with the same issues of having libraries (or whatever >are logically equivalent to DLLs) potentially linked at different bases in >the two address spaces? fork() is part of the OS in Linux and the fork() function is absolutely intrinsic and necessary for anything on Linux or UNIX to work correctly. It doesn't have to deal with anything like this since a fork is in the low level of the OS, not in a library running in an application. cgf -- 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/