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:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version; q=dns; s=default; b=r3SJpdPpQxeDxwfvI4Es1de0uMe34 v3r8zenN8/XBJbSajcF7QFyfldVMQrBLyjT7P6K+OjSozPKAEW5r8mSzuS7EZkaF QXSCxBUfGIGa2QOO9MBF69jxxCyxgbmjtQ19dQzgc052pechzHOa24CzawgivYY0 wc/qMx4WjSMfy8= 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:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version; s=default; bh=GgBUu/MHhsEdVj1YiXL+cwKHfwo=; b=QYv wAPWCSV9XCY7FGxDm+joAQLFLx5Ccwi+87+OmsuDabFWtoStH5wssFWTcz7OlfNS yWvsj0v4Z/bAtfTFaCv/Dzx7OCvJuGh+y9hIyICm2xivvOTDpjzDKjweGt0+L8jw Z3apWTRdbKBypGawl+InqWRfEXkFCnM+iLm46Exs= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,MIME_BASE64_BLANKS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=ring, Ring, Hx-languages-length:2797 X-HELO: outmail148093.authsmtp.net From: David Allsopp To: "cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" Subject: RE: Cygwin x86 on Windows 10 ARM64 Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 07:46:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20180710130410 DOT GL27673 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> In-Reply-To: <20180710130410.GL27673@calimero.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Server-Quench: ba82755a-85a7-11e8-9efd-0015176ca198 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd1ZAARAlZZRRob BgsNCCtbTh09PVtK DAMVJhpVP1sPfQ9A PVlbKBxYN1gKHAse eSNXRFZUUVVhWWt/ bwxbaQMTYEtNQQRq VVZLQ1BMFQRsHh4E GR9QFR8BcF4dIxdw YEJnXXkVWE1/fAgv E0ZWEmgDNHpobTEY TUFZIgtJeVYcKgJF alF6VXQLMjQGb3Iu JSJhdxsgMipeLmxF El9FKlRafkcNEjkj XFhbRX0GJ2hbG03J X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633634383431.1038:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 213.105.212.114/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id w6C7l3CJ002235 Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jul 10 10:51, David Allsopp wrote: > > I've been trying out the x86 emulation in Microsoft's ARM64 version of > > Windows 10 1803. > > > > I had two issues with Cygwin x86. The first, which is simple, is that > > Windows doesn't by default create C:\Windows\SysWOW64\drivers\etc > > which causes /etc/postinstall/base-files-mketc.sh to exit with an > > error all the time. I wonder if there's a possible workaround to make > that less intrusive? > > Try if C:\Windows\Sysnative\drivers\etc works. That should be the easiest > way to fix the issue in the script. It does indeed. Certainly seems like a good fallback (if not possible default, although I'm sure someone out there takes advantage of a different hosts file between 32-bit and 64-bit!!). I'm happy to tweak the script if you can remind me where its repo is? > > The error message implies that it may have computed the wrong > > directory, which it hasn't - it's just that the directory doesn't exist. > > > > The other is that all Cygwin binaries are emitting the "Could not > > compute FAST_CWD pointer" warning. > > Nothing we can do about, unless somebody dives into assembler code on such > a system. If the code switches to ARM64 early, this could be tricky. The machine I'm using is only for testing on this platform - I can grant access to it if it'd be worth looking into? > As a workaround I pushed a patch to check for running in WOW64 under > ARM64. The warning is skipped then. The already existing fallback code > should work most of the time. Just give the latest developer snapshot > from https://cygwin.com/snapshots/ a try. OK, so this is very weird - both GetNativeSystemInfo and GetSystemInfo are returning 0 in both wProcessorArchitecture and wReserved (and FWIW 586 in dwProcessorType). This is with GCC 6.4.0 (i686-w64-mingw32-gcc) and with Microsoft's own **x86** Cl (19.15.26629.1 in VS 2017.8 Preview 4). My test program is simply: #define WINVER 0x0A00 #define _WIN32_WINNT 0x0A00 #include #include int main(void) { SYSTEM_INFO si; GetNativeSystemInfo(&si); printf("si.wProcessorArchitecture = %d\n", si.wProcessorArchitecture); printf("si.wReserved = %d\n", si.wReserved); printf("si.dwProcessorType = %d\n", si.dwProcessorType); GetSystemInfo(&si); printf("si.wProcessorArchitecture = %d\n", si.wProcessorArchitecture); printf("si.wReserved = %d\n", si.wReserved); printf("si.dwProcessorType = %d\n", si.dwProcessorType); } However, when built with Microsoft's ARM64 CL, I get wProcessorArchitecture == 12, as expected. I'm currently on Windows 10.0.17134.137 (1803). I've just switched the machine to the Fast Insider Ring to see if it's the same. The PROCESSOR_ARCHITEW6432 variable is at least ARM64! David -- 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