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:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=CpJmXYj7OpADN6jeUelmmj6kTtkVW91EVfl6bhvE2V0n1xTPbvJil
	Ua7JBD5CfaJg+ucbO3TPYvlzMDOdP8mdwSSJ+J756laE/Gw0Ua85D7jZQuhw9GJB
	wpNlHmYXwXRUmz7K0Uenx/CGdJMTZueGj5weTKIaOaEl3RPNjvncBE=
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:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	 bh=aolgnVnWUbKA3vfwvN7VFWYwz08=; b=LQAiNvXBkLDx6TlRUEPjwegiinam
	boDHZAQtqV5p6Hnr6UE/ZC2712BkpRkQoHwGhPi7yU8P1Gz+93XEMZHomjx2EcXC
	Sl0WQRKyyQ/NdF4Pf0mlJMwg602jvPX7AM5Meccag6iQXyusrQ5hCOc4BpV/wzPs
	1EikTHVlA6NLz8s=
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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: calimero.vinschen.de
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 21:29:58 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygcheck -svc segfaults on Windows 8.1 with cygwin64
Message-ID: <20131119202958.GH2936@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <1384839303 DOT 14356 DOT YahooMailNeo AT web125203 DOT mail DOT ne1 DOT yahoo DOT com> <20131119100343 DOT GA27525 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <528B93E6 DOT 3030802 AT etr-usa DOT com> <20131119171330 DOT GF2936 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <528BAC3D DOT 9070506 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <20131119190343 DOT GG2936 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <528BBA1A DOT 2080209 AT cygwin DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="S5HS5MvDw4DmbRmb"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <528BBA1A.2080209@cygwin.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

--S5HS5MvDw4DmbRmb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Nov 19 14:20, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> On 11/19/2013 2:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Nov 19 13:21, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >>On 11/19/2013 12:13 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>>Why do they have to make such a mess out of a simple function like
> >>>GetVersionEx?  It returns different OS version numbers based on the
> >>>existence of a manifest in the executable.  How dense is that?
> >>>
> >>>So we have thousands of executables, none of them has a 8.1 manifest.
> >>>As a result, the uname() function returns OS versions 6.2 rather than
> >>>6.3.  Aaaaaargh.
> >>>
> >>>In cygcheck I added a patch to check dwBuildNumber this morning.  If
> >>>it's >=3D 9200, it's 8.1/2012R2, otherwise 8/2012.  But that doesn't
> >>>fix the OS version number of course.  Sigh.
> >>>
> >>>I'm going to tweak the OS version number and I'll do the same in
> >>>Cygwin's uname function as well.
> >>
> >>Good grief. I suppose I need to add something similar to
> >>/usr/lib/csih/winProductName.exe...
> >
> >Looks like it, yes.  What on earth were they thinking?
>=20
> Who says they were thinking? ;-)

Point.

I found what happened:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dn302074%28v=3Dvs.8=
5%29.aspx

Given that we are unable to provide and change manifests on the fly for
thousands of executables, we will have to hack our way along in future
because all upcoming versions of Windows will return a wrong OS version
number.

Why isn't there at least an additional non-manifest way to claim
compatibility with the current OS? :(


Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--S5HS5MvDw4DmbRmb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
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=mc2q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--S5HS5MvDw4DmbRmb--