Mail Archives: cygwin/2010/09/18/17:48:31
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 08:36:28PM +0200, Al wrote:
>>> A second thought. I wonder if reabaseall could be improved to run from
>>> within bash, without the need to close down all running windows. Then
>>> it could even be included into build scripts to be run after each
>>> build.
>>
>> No, because the DLLs used by bash are OFTEN the ones that actually DO
>> need to be rebased (because they are used by darn near everything, so we
>> need to ensure that their image base does not conflict with anything
>> else): libintl, libiconv, libncurses, ...
>>
>
>What I suggest isn't that usefull when you think to base all
>DLL that have been installed by setup.exe. It becomes usefull in the
>moment the user starts to compile his own DLL especially if he used
>scripts to control compilation. To compile somethng is a typical use
>of cygwin.
No, it really isn't.
>I try to be more precise. Let's call it rebaseplus, but it's
>code is to 80% similar to rebaseall and duplication of code has known
>disadvantages.
>
>Once rebaseall has been run from ash we can be sure the listed DLLs
>have sane addresses and bash does work. Now rebaseplus can be run from
>within bash (and scripts) using a user contributed list of DLL (-T-option).
>It would base the user contributed DLL into a different address space than
>rebaseall does.
This isn't a bad idea but it's not really a typical use case. Perhaps you'd
like to offer a patch to rebaseall to accomplish this?
cgf
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -