On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 07:40:25PM -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote:So, there is no "cygserver" package... it will just be part of cygwin1.dll? Is that correct? Excuse me for not following development until now... it really hasn't affected me until today.
Right. cygserver.exe will be part of the cygwin package.
Okay. Thanks.
The cygserver directory also contains a README file which describes
Where is this cygserver directory? Are you referring to the CVS tree for cygwin1.dll?
Yes.
Thanks.
However, I'd like to ask maintainers of affected packages to give Cygserver a try. You will have to rebuild your packages and you should make sure that the Cygwin header files sys/ipc.h, sys/msg.h, sys/sem.h and sys/shm.h overwrote the cygipc files before building your package(s). And don't link against libcygipc ;-)
Sounds like we are going to have to have a flag day for Cygwin/X and all related packages to remove the link to cygipc and use the built-in SHM support provided by cygserver. That is not really a problem for me, and I know more about package maintanence now so it should be easier this time around.
The gotcha here, though, is that you still have to install cygserver and get it running. Corinna has provided install scripts to make that to happen but experience shows us that there will probably be some tweaking required before everything is perfect.
Ah, well, in the case of XWin.exe, it detects whether the an SHM allocation succeeds or fails and enables/disables the X SHM extension appropriately. Each X application tests for presence of the SHM extension and doesn't try to use it if it is not there.
Thus, all of our apps and libs link against cygipc. We can still build with SHM support but it won't actually be used unless things are setup properly, as you described.
That is okay: most people don't need the SHM support. The only reason for SHM support in the default server is to keep from having to distribute both an SHM-enabled and SHM-disabled set of packages; now we have one set that can use SHM if it is setup properly.
So I think we will be okay... no one will be required to have cygserver actually working.
Harold
