X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4473D20E.5090507@cygwin.com> Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 23:25:02 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051223 Fedora/1.5-0.2.fc4.remi Thunderbird/1.5 Mnenhy/0.7.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: 1.15.19 dlopen() dies with no dlerror() References: <4472AF3B DOT 2050300 AT kleckner DOT net> <4473B387 DOT 2020905 AT kleckner DOT net> <4473C5C9 DOT 50104 AT cygwin DOT com> <4473CF07 DOT 9090201 AT kleckner DOT net> In-Reply-To: <4473CF07.9090201@kleckner.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Jim Kleckner wrote: > > > 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? The part of the fix that is Cygwin-specific is in the Cygwin snapshot you have. But, like I said, there's another part of the fix that's only in GDB's CVS version right now. If you want to be rid of the problem right now, you need both changes and that means you'll need to grab GDB's source from CVS and build it. But whether you choose to do this or not should not inhibit your original investigation. Depending on how many times your code path takes you through pthread_ket_create(), it may test test your tolerance level for the current work-around though. ;-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/