--enable-runtime-pseudo-reloc support in cygwin, take 3.
Sat Dec 7 16:39:00 GMT 2002
Charles Wilson wrote:
> I've tested Egor's patch and it seems to work just fine, as demonstrated
> by the two test cases he posted last week, AND as demonstrated by the
> test case posted to the binutils list some months ago (it tested
> pseudo-reloc behavior in the child after a fork).
> I've also tested Egor's runtime reloc support with Ralf's binutils "use
> the DLL as the import lib" and it ALSO works fine in all three cases.
> I'm going to continue using ld.exe-ralf and
> cygwin1.dll-egor/libcygwin.a-egor for my day-to-day use, just to see if
> something wacky crops up...
> On balance, I agree that #1 is the best option. Unless I run afoul of
> some unforseen wackiness in the next few days, recommend inclusion as is
> (in the most recent iteration, e.g. no cygwin.sc changes)
So far, no problems. I'm gonna go on record in favor of this patch, in
its 4th incarnation
given that winsup/cygwin/lib/getopt.c(*) still retains its BSD licensing
and comments, there's no reason to change the (non-)license/public
domain attribution in egor's pseudo-relocs.c file. Egor's patch #4
should be able to be committed as-is.
(*) winsup/cygwin/lib/getopt.c still retains the original
BSD-with-advert license which is explicitly incompatible with the GPL.
And since it is the NetBSD variant, it doesn't fall under the
"rescinded" announcement made by the Berkeley folks:
(the NetBSD folks are quite clear that they LIKE the advertisement
clause in their license)
However, the FreeBSD folks DO abide by the "rescind clause 3" decision;
perhaps we should replace our (modified) getopt.c with a similarly
modified one from FreeBSD?
More information about the Cygwin-patches