X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	 q=dns; s=default; b=k9GXP6Wfsnt93YcsrKTmrg8BoPGPTFaC/ZHLED6SCph
	I8bWCppe8tGN1eGBOO6VK144hup0bw2kAt40LnUF6Rcn11VndAp61VJs6iEb47rR
	2/Z1Wi1mwWNzr0YnH7mZ17GVq0r0qYzXAxcvWGx0QE7Jw5YGJKMu9SFAFCEid79g
	=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	 s=default; bh=GlVh/uBCiCYEze2r3+7QwCxleQU=; b=tXzs/0uUxRoAWNPKd
	qWg9EnBmG5WaJCzXSvql/Dmh9Ai99F0fCU5T1RyOr3AMpJbcGb2/0iQO2TSrVFlU
	vLg8jZzZzKGmqLuC/ObuHXQNHxw7SN1E02I28u0yLXs51DaGsoUt0OK5SdVGBRbP
	YPxwRiQvhYG67nbzsxMvJqs9dU=
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
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
Message-ID: <52178ED2.4090806@etr-usa.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:33:22 -0600
From: Warren Young <warren AT etr-usa DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Why are the 32- and 64-bit cygwin1.dlls incompatible?
References: <52162CA9 DOT 9080002 AT etr-usa DOT com> <20130822171419 DOT GQ2562 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <CA+sc5mnedD0hOfzwTWYzy0QVhKC9gg-C68Nxfska-HG0HFOpLQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20130823094919 DOT GT2562 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To: <20130823094919.GT2562@calimero.vinschen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 8/23/2013 03:49, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> Since it neither makes sense to propagate the Cygwin-specific
> child_info_spawn block to native processes, nor to Cygwin processes
> with a different bitsize, I just disabled this, so you can now start
> 32 bit Cygwin processes from 64 bit Cygwin processes and vice versa,
> starting with the snapshots I'm just generating.

Beautiful!

I just tried this snapshot:

   http://cygwin.com/snapshots/x86_64/cygwin1-20130823.dll.bz2

and my 'ls' test succeeded.

Alas, my Orpie test failed:

   $ PATH=/cygdrive/c/cygwin32/lib/lapack /cygdrive/c/cygwin32/bin/orpie
   Fatal error: exception Assert_failure("main.ml", 30, 3)

Line 30 of main.ml is:

   assert (cbreak ());

So....ncurses isn't working correctly across the exec() boundary?

> I just hope this won't lead to more confusion if 32 bit processes
> started from 64 bit (or vice versa) don't act as expected in some
> circumstances.

Oh, it probably will, but a cygcheck dump will tell us when this is 
probably happening, because both Cygwin bins will be in the PATH.

I'm hoping this new behavior will simply serve to let more people move 
to Cygwin 64 before absolutely everything is ported.

To my mind, the biggest negative consequence of this improvement is that 
it might delay the porting of some packages by removing an incentive.

--
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