HEADSUP: Python 2.7 upgrade
Mon Jan 28 10:35:00 GMT 2013
On Jan 26 01:08, szgyg wrote:
> On 1/24/2013 1:29 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Jan 24 11:41, marco atzeri wrote:
> >>On 1/24/2013 10:39 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>>I debugged this last week, and I don't see how this could be a rebase
> >>>bug. [...] To me this indicates a bug in objcopy.
> Strip copies the whole .reloc section, including entries for removed
> debug sections. This is documented in rebase/README. Rebase checks
> for this condition in Relocations::relocate and silently ignores
> wrong entries. Well, except in Marco's dict_snowball.dll.
> >>>The size of the .reloc section in the file header does not indicate how
> >>>long the relocation information in the section actually is. Usually the
> >>>section is larger than the actual relocation info. The end of the
> >>>relocation info is indicated by a block header with a base offset of 0
> >>>and a sizeof of 0, let's call it the NULL block.
> VirtualSize (offset 8 in section header) should be exact. There are
> no terminator zero block, but can be zero section padding.
> VirtualSize + padding = SizeOfRawData.
Are you implying that rebase (or better: the included imagehelper lib)
is doing the right thing, or not? The size of the reloc section is
taken from SizeOfRawData. Relocations::check checks if the data is
within a valid section. I just don't see what it's doing wrong there.
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
More information about the Cygwin-apps