DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 56UB40lD1773305
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 56UB40lD1773305
Authentication-Results: delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=Epz4e+B9
X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E542D3858C50
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1753873439;
	bh=3wm7R8DmuwVYdChTk07sSw3Sm3+ot5POnab3CJ+MTyk=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	 List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	 From;
	b=Epz4e+B9C1lHdwnWuT1JSxHvYLmh/rqA4fUByWfbZ3slVkZX8nWTg6OSQMGHXGsKd
	 4NbUxncz27GjhWXhbSqPDLhNsaTJFU5NZXa8MmdJ+Bpe1rAH+I6gTO2fgdVlh4MhIE
	 k06sZA+nn42mcAsh5SeCgW13vLolmvWVv604JIA8=
X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AB7C73858C31
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 13:03:19 +0200
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: new c++ new/delete overloads need wrapping?
Message-ID: <aIn797Usns3L5vr0@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <81535510-8360-1c72-442a-0b630a6d937f AT jdrake DOT com>
 <aINAAW2oh-EfgP0V AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <d2b0c82b-7390-7efe-789f-8d11120ec12a AT jdrake DOT com>
 <aIdBw5iSaIonAPbI AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <80497791-d323-4204-66ef-4b1a8ff45aa9 AT jdrake DOT com>
 <aIiItsyRODNPeqez AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <ba3639bf-1286-4a97-583b-42ee7e61cecb AT jdrake DOT com>
 <2786ab8c-11a7-b1e4-59a0-02f567b3f368 AT jdrake DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2786ab8c-11a7-b1e4-59a0-02f567b3f368@jdrake.com>
X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From: Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender: "Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Jul 29 14:34, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2025, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 29 Jul 2025, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> >
> > > On Jul 28 12:57, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 28 Jul 2025, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> > > > > Unless there's some automatism referencing the __wrap_X functions even
> > > > > if the --wrap option isn't present, I don't see this incompatibility as
> > > > > much of a problem.  We're trying to maintain backward compat, but that
> > > > > doesn't mean an executable created under  and for a newer Cygwin DLL
> > > > > has to run under an older DLL.
> > > >
> > > > OK, then the patch adds support for wrapping these functions ends up in a
> > > > stable Cygwin release, then GCC is updated to add additional --wrap
> > > > parameters for them, and that GCC and binaries it produces will no longer
> > > > be compatible with older Cygwin DLLs.
> > >
> > > *iff* the --wrap option is used with functions not provided by older
> > > DLLs, right?  Not for some reason generally incompatible, I hope...
> >
> > Correct.  However, I expect that to be very common for C++ binaries,
> > because it seems like the C++14 sized delete is now used by default for
> > ordinary (non-array) delete.
> 
> Oh, and you know what else uses these symbols... libstdc++-6.dll.
> And the larger cygwin_cxx_malloc struct will mean that binaries that try
> to fill it out will need a newer DLL version with the larger struct
> (libstdc++-6.dll being notable there as it provides the implementations
> generally).

Yeah, so we can only do this after we updated Cygwin.

Maybe we only want that with 3.7, it sounds like a major version
kind of breakage.


Corinna

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