simplifying rebaseall

Christopher Faylor
Sun Sep 19 01:15:00 GMT 2010

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 08:36:28PM +0200, Al wrote:
>>> A second thought. I wonder if reabaseall could be improved to run from
>>> within bash, without the need to close down all running windows. Then
>>> it could even be included into build scripts to be run after each
>>> build.
>> No, because the DLLs used by bash are OFTEN the ones that actually DO
>> need to be rebased (because they are used by darn near everything, so we
>> need to ensure that their image base does not conflict with anything
>> else): libintl, libiconv, libncurses, ...
>What I suggest isn't that usefull when you think to base all
>DLL that have been installed by setup.exe. It becomes usefull in the
>moment the user starts to compile his own DLL especially if he used
>scripts to control compilation. To compile somethng is a typical use
>of cygwin.

No, it really isn't.

>I try to be more precise. Let's call it rebaseplus, but it's
>code is to 80% similar to rebaseall and duplication of code has known
>Once rebaseall has been run from ash we can be sure the listed DLLs
>have sane addresses and bash does work. Now rebaseplus can be run from
>within bash (and scripts) using a user contributed list of DLL (-T-option).
>It would base the user contributed DLL into a different address space than
>rebaseall does.

This isn't a bad idea but it's not really a typical use case.  Perhaps you'd
like to offer a patch to rebaseall to accomplish this?


Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list