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: List-Archive: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 17:59:04 -0400 From: Chris Faylor To: Corinna Vinschen Cc: cygdev , "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" Subject: Re: ntsec: patch 9 Message-ID: <19990805175904.A4076@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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i In-Reply-To: <37AA044E.C6095286@vinschen.de>; from Corinna Vinschen on Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 11:38:22PM +0200 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. cgf