X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4B196F53.6010603@nc.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:21:39 -0500
From: Ed Gaines <egaines AT nc DOT rr DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Confusion re: use of rebaseall vs. rebase to relieve BitDefender  woes
References: <4B18F846 DOT 60300 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>
In-Reply-To: <4B18F846.60300@cs.umass.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Thanks so much for your response!  A few mop-up questions below. Hope you
don't mind.

Eliot Moss <moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu> wrote:
> Dear Ed -- 
> I posted this a couple of days ago under another
> thread. 

My apologies.  I thought I'd researched this carefully before posting.
Should have cast my net a bit wider, I guess.

> Here is the rebase procedure that works for me:
> 
> /bin/rebase -d -b 0x61000000 -o 0x20000 -v -T <file with list of dll and 
> so files> > rebase.out

I notice that the rebaseall defaults (assuming I have them correctly) for
the -b and -o flags are:
    -b: 0x70000000
    -o: 0x10000
Was there some bit of information in particular that caused you to choose
0x61000000 and 0x20000, respectively, or was it a matter of trial and error?
(If you know of a good reference for windows's memory model and layout, feel
free to point me in that direction).

> 
> and
> 
> /bin/peflags -d0 -v -T <file with list of dll and so files> > peflags-d.out

Okay, so with the -d0 flag, you're telling peflags to set the dynamicbase flag
to 0 on all specified files - meaning, I guess that these libraries and
executables should NOT be "randomly rebased at load time by the OS?"  A naive
question: why wouldn't you want that to occur? (again, if the answer to that
question is too involved, feel free to point me to documentation).

> /bin/peflags -t0 -v -T <file with list of exe files>        > peflags-t.out

And here the -t0 flag sets the "tsaware" flag to 0 on the specified files --
i.e., the executable/library should not be reconfigured as multi-user.  Correct?

I note from microsoft's site that "/TSAWARE is not valid for drivers, VxDs, or
DLLs."  But is there some reason you wouldn't want the .exe files to to be
mult-user aware?  Other than the fact that on a standalone desktop PC, it wouldn't
really make much sense :-> ?
> 
> Note particularly the base and -o values, and be sure the check the
> output. Also, you have to do all this under ash, etc., and build a
> list of files first with find (or just list particular directories'
> files). I found there ae one or two files I had to exclude because
> rebase halts on them.
> 
> Best wishes -- Eliot Moss

Thanks again for your help and patience! And again, a pointer to documentation
will suffice to answer my questions -- particularly if any or all of them would
require a treatise by way of answer ;-)

-- Ed



--
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