Corinna Vinschen writes:
> On Dec 13 23:06, Achim Gratz wrote:
>> Ken Brown writes:
>> > 1. Shouldn't you have removed the following line from rebase_do?
>> >
>> > peflags ${verbose} -d0 -t0 -T "${g}"
>>
>> That isn't redundant and has nothing to do with the stuff in peflags_do,
>> although I don't remember exactly what the problem was that was resolved
>> by this. The current toolchain should be clean, though, so it may best
>> be an optional step.
>
> This looks wrong. -d0 is ok on 32 bit due to the tight memory layout,
> but -t0 is very certainly wrong. You *want* Cygwin executables to be
> TS aware, so, if at all, -t1 would be required.
This is only used for dynamic objects and the TSAware flag is bogus on
those, according to your statement here:
https://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2012-04/msg00608.html
> <history lesson>
>
> Way back when none of the Cygwin binaries were TS aware (before we
> defaulted to it in GCC), we had mysterious crashes when trying to run
> bash from terminal server session on "real" terminal servers (in
> contrast to remote desktop sessions on XP++ and non-TS servers). I even
> opened a case with Microsoft at the time.
>
> It turned out that terminal servers check the TS awareness bit, and if
> it's unset, a compatibility layer DLL is hooked into the process, which
> performs certain compatibility tests. For some reason, one of the test
> left some pages in the process text segment unexecutable, which then
> resulted in a very quick SEGV in bash. After the Microsofties
> discovered that the problem was based on the missing TS-awareness flag
> in bash, they dropped the issue as "won't fix". The solution was "set
> the TS-awareness flag".
>
> </history lesson>
Further up in that same thread. :-)
Regards,
Achim.
--
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+
SD adaptation for Waldorf rackAttack V1.04R1:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada
