X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4B3A36D0.3030102@gmail.com>
References: <6c18a4f0912251015k48ff2266l8fca37fc2543772e AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <20091227151902 DOT GB27191 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> 	 <6c18a4f0912270949o5460c1ceq33f9e93d476614a2 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <416096c60912270956l3a82fb8fu3a62d6532dc1988a AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <6c18a4f0912271000i3c5f5ecewccf1bb77e30d88b4 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <4B37E68C DOT 9000304 AT cygwin DOT com> 	 <20091227233155 DOT GA12367 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> 	 <6c18a4f0912280230k601eca9me32c056e09117866 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <6c18a4f0912290754h34c5a28s31091eeb6af1cc5a AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <4B3A36D0 DOT 3030102 AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:22:36 +0100
Message-ID: <6c18a4f0912290922u7a1950b8v3974855629d779e0@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: No go after update to 1.7.1
From: Bernd Bartmann <bernd DOT bartmann AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT 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 Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> =A0We have a suspect:
>
>> "11:09:08,3362588","bash.exe","3396","CreateFileMapping","C:\Programme\B=
itDefender\BitDefender 2010\Active Virus Control\midas32-v2_58\PLUGIN_NT.M3=
2","SUCCESS","SyncType: SyncTypeOther"
>
> =A0That's listed on BLODA. =A0You may be able to work around by following=
 the
> rebase advice discussed in these threads:
>
> "BitDefender again"
> =A0http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-08/threads.html#00771
> =A0http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-09/threads.html#00009
>
> "Confusion re: use of rebaseall vs. rebase to relieve BitDefender woes"
> =A0http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-12/threads.html#00159
>
> (I left a question unanswered in one of those threads about what the effe=
cts
> of relocating the cygwin1 dll to a low base address could be; the brief a=
nswer
> would be "largely theoretical, unless you're the type who does massive nu=
mber
> crunching with huge arrays in fortran, or similar".)

Dave, thanks a lot! I followed the advice to rebase the cygwin1.dll
and now I get a bash shell prompt. So indeed the combination of cygwin
and BitDefender 2010 is the root cause of the problem.

Now how to go on to get the cygwin installation fixed? As Larry
pointed out - because bash could not be run during the setup process
the postinstall scripts couldn't be run.
Shall I just reinstall all packages but the core cygwin package?

Also, it is not entirely clear to me if cygwin or BitDefender is to
blame for the problem. Is there work going on to address this issue
from the cygwin side? Should I contact BitDefender about the problem?
I would regret it if cygwin can't be installed by Joe User on a system
that has BitDefender 2010 installed as well.

Best regards,
Bernd.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple