On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 09:26:39AM -0800, cppjavaperl wrote: >Then I tried it on an old machine running SuSE 9.0 (kernel 2.4.21, even). >In this case, ldd fails only if the *program's* executable has no execute >permissions.? The dependent DLLs are not required to have executable >permissions -- all the dependent DLLs were enumerated whether they had the >executable permissions or not.
I'll try to be clearer. We obviously know how to scan an executable for dependent DLLs since cygcheck does it already (and actually cygwin itself does this) but we are not going to be modifying ldd to deal with the case of non-executable binaries. -- 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
