Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <002101c0f174$84cd20b0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <000901c0ef4e$904cbe50$6e032bb7 AT BRAMSCHE> <018e01c0ef53$02e833f0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <002b01c0f0e9$07d17e70$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010610004355 DOT E29231 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: process-startup headache.
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 16:13:50 +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 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jun 2001 06:03:48.0177 (UTC) FILETIME=[1D513C10:01C0F173]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 2:43 PM
Subject: Re: process-startup headache.


> I haven't waded through my email but I assume that this probably
> is quoted from the cygwin list since it seems to have shown up
> here with no preceding messages.

Nope, it's a quote from a prior thread here, which I managed to confuse
you with. Sorry..

> Can I ask that when people decide to move a discussion here that they
> provide enough context to understand what people are talking about?

Thats a very reasonable request. I thought I had achieved that by
quoting the paragraph in my earlier full email about slow startup &&
trouble with paul's ld. Both of which I thought were non-application,
cygwin1.dll only issues.

I suspect I erred on the side of bandwidth :].

> For instance, the words "A similar-in-appearance problem is
> occurring..." would be helped with something indicating what the
> similarity was referring to.

The problem as initially reported was similar to the slow startup
issue - that has turned out to be a call to NetEnumServers, which
Corinna indicates she may have fixed, but I haven't had time to look
into yet.

Rob

> cgf
>
> On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 11:35:20PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
> >
> >
> >> Hi folk,
> >>
> >> A similar-in-appearance problem is occuring with binaries linked by
a
> >> patched ld.exe, (which I just installed tonight, so the first thing
is
> >> not an artifact of that). I'm trying out Paul Solovosky{I hope
thats
> >> right}'s ld-that-auto-imports.
> >>
> >
> >This problem is not related to the slow startup problem. The problem
is
> >that the .dll's generated by Paul's ld, have a default base address
of
> >0x610c0000 which collides with cygwin's base addres of 0x61000000.
> >Cygwin doesn't seem to be relocatable in practice, even though the
.dll
> >is marked as relocatable.
> >
> >Workaround: To build .dll's with the patched ld that work with cygwin
> >1.3.2 use -Wl,--image-base=0x10000000 on the gcc commandle line.
> >(0x10000000 is the default .dll address according to MSDN. [don't
> >use --dll - --dll creates the 0x610c0000 address that doesn't work).
> >
> >Long term solution:I think cygwin1.dll should be marked
non-relocatable
> >to prevent .dll's that collide with the cygwin1.dll causing crashes
and
> >unexplained behaviour.
>