Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 13:38:32 +0300 From: Egor Duda X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.45) Personal Reply-To: Egor Duda Organization: DEO X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1983285237.20010321133832@logos-m.ru> To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: State of the DLL, mark 2? In-reply-To: <20010320101715.K32706@redhat.com> References: <20010319203650 DOT A30559 AT redhat DOT com> <907012433 DOT 20010320162719 AT logos-m DOT ru> <20010320091254 DOT F32706 AT redhat DOT com> <2710465067 DOT 20010320172451 AT logos-m DOT ru> <20010320101715 DOT K32706 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi! Tuesday, 20 March, 2001 Christopher Faylor cgf AT redhat DOT com wrote: >>can you give a little hint here? should i strip appropriate sections >>from libc.a or it's better to build newlib with -DMALLOC_PROVIDED ? CF> When I last did this, I removed all of the functions from libc.a with CF> ar. I didn't know about -DMALLOC_PROVIDED. It would probably work, though. well, i've managed to build it with -DMALLOC_PROVIDED, though it was a bit tricky, and it turned out that cygwin1.dll is not the one to blame. i fear that it's bug in ash -- it fails to evaluate complex expressions. attached is testcase (as minimal as i could have worked out). to run, unpack it to /cygdrive/c/temp/ and then cd /cygdrive/c/temp/test/build/i586-pc-cygwin/sourceware/ ./crash.sh i'm not an expert in ash internals, so probably someone more experienced will step forward. does ash have some restrictions like buffer length for single expression? or expression depth? ash is ash-20010129 from latest/ Egor. mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19