Dave Korn schrieb:
Dirk Napierala wrote on 25 September 2008 09:55:
From what we understand by reading the guideline "Changing Cygwin's
Maximum Memory" the result
of the small program written by DJ Delorie tests the memory allocation
limit on your system.
Running the program will output the maximum amount of allocatable memory
of your system.
Doing so on several test systems and the different cygwin versions the
result is _always _1536.
Trying it for example with 2500MB setting on a 4GB system also failed
with "Cannot allocate memory".
There is an upper limit imposed by the dividing point between kernel and
user space at the 2GB mark. You can try adding the /3GB flag in boot.ini to
raise this by a further gig. You might need also to make extensive use of
rebaseall to ensure your DLLs end up at the upper end of that range and don't
fragment the space, or it might not matter, depending on the patterns of
memory usage of the unpacker.
It is not about that we would not like to test such kind of workarounds
it is more the fact that settings
like /3GB flag in boot.ini are out of our control (you know huge
company's and internal politic restrictions
are limiting us very much in implementing such a fix. We don't like it
either, but that is the way it is unfortunately)
Anyway even if this would help, it doesn't explain, why on the same
system, without any other change than
switching the cygwin versions, it works with the old one and doesn't
work with the current one.
The only thing that have changed on this systems is the cygwin version.
Old one woks new one doesn't
It is worse trying to tell somebody to change his code due to the fact
that a new version of cygwin should
be used in the future.
There are also a lot of other valid points for us, But please let us not
that that into the discussion.
There are always reasons pro & contra doing it this or that way.
But if you are limited in the things you are allowed to do, than there
is sometimes no
other chance than trying to fix it within you restricted possibility's.
It probably will not make a difference but it seems like you really
should be trying to set the size to something noticeably larger than the
size of your gzip files.
Done, without success.
This might then work better.
So the SFX file itself doesn't seem to cause this problem.
Random and wacky idea: What happens if you prepend Cygwin's
/bin/unzipsfx.exe to the existing SFX and try running that?
If we test it try to do it using unzip or cmd /c for example it is
working fine.
But also at this point would not help us as a workaround due to the fact
that
the SFX file is called withing cygwin bash by a another (out of our
control) programm
that we can not change ourself.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
