This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: TEST: patch-2.5.8-4 (package maintainers, please note) wrote:

On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 06:53:59PM -0700, David Rothenberger wrote:

Christopher Faylor wrote:

I appreciate the research *very* much but this is not the appropriate
mailing list for this.

I wouldn't bother to comment but I would hate to see a bunch of "This is
just for Corinna for when she gets back" messages here in the next N

Sorry about the mistake. I just wanted to tie the thread started here, which reported the problem and to which Corinna responded, with my research on the main list.

I do understand that problem reports go to the main list, even for apps.

Actually, now that I've generated a fix for the problem, as it turns
out, this *is* an issue for cygwin-apps.

Fixing the problem requires generating a new DLL with a new export --
fdopen64.  If there are any packages built which use fdopen they could
conceivably fail in the same manner as patch.  Sigh.

This means that we may have to go through the "rebuild packages" exercise
again for cygwin 1.5.1.  I will release a 1.5.1 version of cygwin shortly
after generating a snapshot.

I'm still working on understing how you are handling the 64 bit exports, but that's my problem. In the meantime, if we want to apply your newlib patch locally, how are you planning to export fdopen64() and fdopen64_r() from cygwin.din? Are the any further modifications needed to the winsup/cygwin source to support your implimentation?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]