X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 19:04:16 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Please test the latest developer's snapshot Message-ID: <20061107180416.GQ11304@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20061102224831 DOT GA8323 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4550C78B DOT 1030906 AT acm DOT org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4550C78B.1030906@acm.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Nov 7 09:51, David Rothenberger wrote: > On 11/2/2006 2:48 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >The new memory allocation scheme could result in the necessity to rebase > >again. The usual base address of 0x70000000 for rebase *might* result > >in problems with applications using mmap and runtime loaded DLLs. So, > >if you get such a problem, please call rebase(all) with a base addresses > >of, say, 0x65000000 and try again. > > I had to rebaseall to 0x65000000 to get ruby to work. I encountered a > hang when trying to build subversion 1.4.0 until I rebased. Worked great > after that, though. Uh, not that I actually *like* to hear that my suspicion was correct, but that's good to know. It might be worthwhile to change the default base address for rebase at one point. Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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/