,
Chris
>
> From: "Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2004/04/08 Thu PM 03:10:35 EDT
> To: Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CC: Peter Riocreux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: inheriting exec-shield avo
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 15:10:35 -0400, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> Cool. One small nit: for consistency, can we name it wineld instead?
> Or is it winepreld more apropriate? I'm thinking that wineld will
> seem to be the counterpart of winegcc...
In the tree I'm working on it'll be called wineclient, a
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Mike McCormack wrote:
> I've attached the source code. The idea is to run it like this:
>
> wld /home/mike/wine/loader/wine-pthread my.exe
Cool. One small nit: for consistency, can we name it wineld instead?
Or is it winepreld more apropriate? I'm thinking that wineld will
s
Hi Peter,
I'm not familiar with the using "setarch i386" to solve the problem...
I've also been working on the exec-shield problem over the last couple
of days. My solution is similar to Mike Hearn's approach, but faster
and more compact, since it doesn't require loading of libc twice or
stat
Hi Peter,
Yeah, I'm aware of the problem with interitance... there might be a
tricky way to fix it by setting WINELOADER to the name of a script that
runs "wld $winebinary"... otherwise wine will need to be modified.
I just downloaded the source to setarch. We may be able to incorporate
it in
Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yeah, I'm aware of the problem with interitance... there might be a
> tricky way to fix it by setting WINELOADER to the name of a script
> that runs "wld $winebinary"... otherwise wine will need to be modified.
If wld knew (hardcoded or from an environ
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:28:51 +0100, Peter Riocreux wrote:
> I am a bit mystified by that. Is the ". security-patched kernel ?"
> message that is still there not caused by exec-shield?
The problem is probably caused by prelink.
Like Mike said, I have a 90% working solution to this sitting in m
Mike McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Peter,
>
> I'm not familiar with the using "setarch i386" to solve the problem...
>
> I've also been working on the exec-shield problem over the last couple
> of days. My solution is similar to Mike Hearn's approach, but faster
> and more compact, s
Peter Riocreux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am intermittently trying to get Wine to play nicely with a big EDA
> tool, and it is doing not too badly today with the 20040309 snapshot
> on Fedora Core 1.
>
> The thing that I think is stopping it working is that whatever is done
> to stack-shield
I am intermittently trying to get Wine to play nicely with a big EDA
tool, and it is doing not too badly today with the 20040309 snapshot
on Fedora Core 1.
The thing that I think is stopping it working is that whatever is done
to stack-shield by the prepending "setarch i386" on invocation is not
i
10 matches
Mail list logo
