setup.exe rebase patch

Charles Wilson
Tue Feb 26 21:32:00 GMT 2002

Robert Collins wrote:

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Christopher Faylor [] 
>>However, I agree that rebasing shouldn't be the default 
>>behavior.  In fact, I wonder if I should make cygwin 
>>non-rebaseable.  It would load faster if I did that.
> Yes, and it would solve some of the nasty faults -auto-image-base. (The strange behaviour of often choosing a base that collides with cygwin).
> Rob

Note: libtool-devel does not use auto-image-base.  I don't THINK 
libtool-stable does, either.  And all of "my" DLLs have been rebuilt 
over the last several months without auto-image-base.  Just FYI.

Also, there was some code passed back and forth a while ago (Rob, yours 
maybe?) that purported to add a "non-relocatable" option to binutils.  I 
don't remember the specifics, but I think there were some problems with 
that particular implementation.  A working version that added a 
"non-relocatable" option to ld when creating a DLL would be a nice 
addition to binutils.  Anybody remember more about this?  I'm drawing a 


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list