Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin-developers=delorie DOT com AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 22:22:12 -0400
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
To: Corinna Vinschen <corinna AT vinschen DOT de>
Cc: cygdev <cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
        "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
Subject: Re: ntsec: patch 9
Message-ID: <19990805222212.A5691@cygnus.com>
References: <37A8114F DOT 9101F2AE AT vinschen DOT de> <19990804214745 DOT A15316 AT cygnus DOT com> <37A9682E DOT EA185B11 AT vinschen DOT de> <19990805113216 DOT A973 AT cygnus DOT com> <37AA044E DOT C6095286 AT vinschen DOT de> <19990805175904 DOT A4076 AT cygnus DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i
In-Reply-To: <19990805175904.A4076@cygnus.com>; from Chris Faylor on Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 05:59:04PM -0400

On Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 05:59:04PM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 11:38:22PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>The answer is definitely 'no'. In my environments on every computer cygwin1.dll
>>is in /usr/bin directory. If I test new dlls, I rename the old one to e.g
>>cygwin1.dllX and copy the new one again to /usr/bin. With this method, I don't
>>have evil surprises. Moreover I have explicitly checked it by running `find'.
>
>Thanks.  I was 99% sure that this was the case.
>
>>I know, it's not the answer, you like to get :-(
>
>How dare you.  :-)
>
>>Should we (Larry and me) try it without the aforementioned detection code?
>>If so, how can I disable it?
>
>The only way to do it is to back out the patch.  I really can't see how *that*
>particular patch could have that particular problem.
>
>Hmm.  I wonder if something changed in newlib.

Hi,
strace should behave a little better in the next snapshot.  I tracked down
one obvious problem but there is another one lurking there.  Hopefully it
will work well enough now to get an strace log of your 'man tcsh' failure.

-chris