Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <007a01c11337$b09d1c60$806410ac@local>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>, <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <020601c0f27b$d579ea90$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <02a701c11289$bc8b9b90$562fa4cb AT co3007967a> <007e01c112b0$a6de11c0$806410ac AT local> <033a01c112b2$306e53e0$562fa4cb AT co3007967a> <3B5B0686 DOT 5050500 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <009d01c11315$90a94d60$562fa4cb AT co3007967a> <20010722224246 DOT D9168 AT redhat DOT com> <010501c11321$d1b7d9a0$562fa4cb AT co3007967a> <20010722230939 DOT F9168 AT redhat DOT com> <3B5BAA35 DOT 1030306 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Subject: Re: ld --auto-import for cygwin and libtool
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:24:03 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jul 2001 05:10:30.0040 (UTC) FILETIME=[CAD78180:01C11335]


----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: ld --auto-import for cygwin and libtool


> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>
> > It's possible that I might be convinced to include Paul's patches in the
> > next binutils release if they are not incorporated into the official
> > release.  However, I would rather use the official CVS release, if
> > possible.
> >

Given the low level mucking around we're doing with PE here, I wouldn't
suggest that the auto-import functionality be unilaterally introduced by
cygwin - this one really belongs in CVS, or not at all :].



> I'm also now looking at it.  However, I understand that one of the
> sticking points has been the relocation of cygwin1.dll from parent to
> child across fork().  See thread "dll base address" in the
> cygwin-developers archive:
>    http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2001-06/msg00037.html

Nope. This isn't a sticking point. It was an issue I had to diagnose as it
wasn't documented, but it is _not_ related to the auto-import functionality.

<snip>

>
> Q: If so, then (pending further compatibility tests, of course.  I'm
> working on it) can we start experimenting with including Paul's patch in
> binutils?
>
>    subQ: I'm still not sure why the auto-import stuff is gatewayed by
> the fork()/parent/child problem.  They seem orthogonal to me, but
> whatever...


They are orthogonal. I've said so in public twice I think - in the thread
you referenced.

Rob.

ps. the relevant history in a nutshell:

1) Paul releases his patch (documented as just adding --auto-import)
2) Robert (thats me :]) starts playing with it and finds fork() is broken
3) Robert finds that the auto-relocation is the problem
4) Robert finds that Pauls patch _ALSO_ enabled --auto-image-base, which is
disabled by default.

In short: it was my bad luck to be testing with a dll name that hashed to an
address colliding with cygwin.

Rob