I've got my non-stripped package coming. The non-stripped DLL is about 350 kb larger,
although after bzipping, it's only about 80 kb of additional network download (total
of 546 kb in the .tar.bz2 file now).
Many thanks to those of you (Jason, Robert) who helped explain rebase to those of us
w
Robert Collins wrote:
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nicholas Wourms
>>Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2002 10:09 PM
>>To: Jason Tishler
>>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: re
Earnie Boyd wrote:
>Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>
>>Jason Tishler wrote:
>>
>>
Is that a deficiency of cygwin as a whole, or just related to the way
my DLL was built?)
>>>Cygwin's fork() attempts to load DLLs in the child in the same location
>>>as in the parent. If it fails, then t
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nicholas Wourms
> Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2002 10:09 PM
> To: Jason Tishler
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: rebase problem for cygcurl-2.dll still existing?!
>
Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>
> Jason Tishler wrote:
>
> >>Is that a deficiency of cygwin as a whole, or just related to the way
> >>my DLL was built?)
> >>
> >
> >Cygwin's fork() attempts to load DLLs in the child in the same location
> >as in the parent. If it fails, then the child aborts.
> >
> O
Jason Tishler wrote:
>>Is that a deficiency of cygwin as a whole, or just related to the way
>>my DLL was built?)
>>
>
>Cygwin's fork() attempts to load DLLs in the child in the same location
>as in the parent. If it fails, then the child aborts.
>
Other than the lack of someone writing the code
Kevin,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 12:18:36PM -0400, Roth, Kevin P. wrote:
> On one hand, I have CGF asking for stripping of all EXE/DLLs, to save
> on disk space, and also download speed for our dial-up friends (I
> assume).
I stated that my preference was not to strip so that rebasing will work.
I
Earnie,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 12:31:52PM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> Or, provide some means to accomplish an ignore this dll for the rebase
> tool.
This has already been implemented:
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-07/msg00276.html
Jason
Roth, Kevin P. wrote:
>(BTW: for any given version of cygcurl-2.dll, does rebasing need to happen just once
>per target machine [e.g. when cygcurl-2.dll is installed], or also every time
>something that depends on it [such as PHP's curl wrapper] gets installed?)
>
>(BTW2: can anyone explain in
Or, provide some means to accomplish an ignore this dll for the rebase
tool.
Earnie.
"Roth, Kevin P." wrote:
>
> On one hand, I have CGF asking for stripping of all EXE/DLLs, to save on disk space,
>and also download speed for our dial-up friends (I assume).
>
> On the other hand I have Stipe
On one hand, I have CGF asking for stripping of all EXE/DLLs, to save on disk space,
and also download speed for our dial-up friends (I assume).
On the other hand I have Stipe noticing that his PHP package (if memory serves) can't
successfully rebase my cygcurl-2 dll, and therefore doesn't work
John,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 02:46:30PM +0100, Morrison, John wrote:
> > From: Jason Tishler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 09:46:18AM +0100, Morrison, John wrote:
> > > Can you strip a rebased DLL?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Does it work (as opposed to a rebased stripped DLL) wa
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 08:07:53AM -0400, Roth, Kevin P. wrote:
>That would be no problem. However, I'm pretty sure someone on this
>cygwin-apps list instructed me initially to go ahead and strip the DLL.
I don't know if that was me or not, but you should be stripping exe's and
dll's in the pack
> From: Jason Tishler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 09:46:18AM +0100, Morrison, John wrote:
> > Can you strip a rebased DLL?
>
> Yes.
Does it work (as opposed to a rebased stripped DLL) was the
intended question ;)
J.
Kevin,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 08:07:53AM -0400, Roth, Kevin P. wrote:
> Should I remove the stripping?
This would be my preference, but I only "solves" the rebase problem for
curl -- there are still other packages with this issue. Besides, this
is only a workaround and does not fix the root ca
John,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 09:46:18AM +0100, Morrison, John wrote:
> Can you strip a rebased DLL?
Yes.
Jason
TECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Roth, Kevin P.Sent: Tuesday, 16 July 2002 10:08
PMTo: cygwin-appsSubject: RE: rebase problem for
cygcurl-2.dll still existing?!
That would be no problem. However, I'm pretty sure someone on
this cygwin-apps list instructed me initially t
Title: RE: rebase problem for cygcurl-2.dll still existing?!
That would be no problem. However, I'm pretty sure someone on this cygwin-apps list instructed me initially to go ahead and strip the DLL. So could I get a third opinion? Should I remove the stripping? Should I rebase the DL
Can you strip a rebased DLL?
> From: Stipe Tolj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Kevin,
>
> I guess I know what the problem is about your packaged cygcurl-2.dll.
>
> In both current packages 7.9.6-1 and 7.9.8-1 you have packaged a
> stripped DLL. It seems when you rebase a stripped DLL the resul
Kevin,
I guess I know what the problem is about your packaged cygcurl-2.dll.
In both current packages 7.9.6-1 and 7.9.8-1 you have packaged a
stripped DLL. It seems when you rebase a stripped DLL the resulting
DLL is corrupt.
Hence any DLL inside a binary package should *not* be stripped to be
20 matches
Mail list logo
