X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <057e01c7e34d$c4a67a20$0600a8c0@ze4427wm>
From: "Aaron Gray" <angray AT beeb DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <03ca01c7e296$3698e4f0$0600a8c0 AT ze4427wm> <06e801c7e29c$38a6a790$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <040701c7e2a7$d4c7ace0$0600a8c0 AT ze4427wm> <051501c7e339$4aeb3cc0$0600a8c0 AT ze4427wm> <07be01c7e33d$abfb45b0$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <20070820153036 DOT GD23854 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <057301c7e348$fe582b10$0600a8c0 AT ze4427wm> <07da01c7e34a$be6873f0$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM>
Subject: Re: Problem building GCC on Cygwin on Vista
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:15:54 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	format=flowed; 	charset="iso-8859-1"; 	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
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 20 August 2007 17:42, Aaron Gray wrote:
>
>>> On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:
>
>>>>   BTW, you didn't by any chance use winzip to unpack the tarball did 
>>>> you?
>>
>> No.
>
>  Just checking.  Windoze tools don't generally do the right thing for
> cygwin's emulation of posix perms.
>
>>> Apart from that, the file permission settings are the same in Vista
>>> compared to older OSes.  The exception is the UAC stuff which could
>>> result in some executables having less permissions than usual, if, for
>>> instance, Internet Explorer has been used to download the executable.
>>> We can hopefully rule this out here, so it's just some permission
>>> problem which has nothing to do with the base OS.
>
>  I want to throw an AYS in Corinna's general direction here... one of the
> ongoing problems in 'doze security since waaaay back when is that the 
> default
> perms for user-created files, the equivalent of the default umask under 
> posix,
> have always been pretty wide open: AYS they haven't been tightened up for
> Vista?
>
>> Works fine on XP. The only things that are diferent are the Cygwin
>> instillation and Vista.
>
>  Heh, so that's a bit like saying "The only things that are different are
> everything, apart from the gcc source code".
>
>> Unmodified GCC 4.2.0 compiles okay, but when modified cracks appear, only 
>> on
>> Vista though, XP is okay. So must be something to do with permissions.
>
>  So, what tool did you use to 'modify' it?

A Windows text editor called Zeus.

I have been altering the C source code and some configureation and 
gcc/makefile but AFAICT nothing that should effect gcc/configure though.

Its all very odd.

Hopefully I shall get to the bottom of it if I perservere, but any help or 
suggestions are welcome.

Aaron


--
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/