Hello Peter,
>> > Ah, now I see it. You have to be careful with your typing. >> > pseudo_stubs.dll (with one s in the end) is the name that fails. >> > Apparently both pseudo_stub.dll (no s) and psuedo_stubs.dll (bad >> > spelling) work. And pseudo_stubss.dll (double s) definitely >> works, that >> > I have tried myself. >> >> You have checked what error 998 actually is? >> >> #define ERROR_NOACCESS 998L > Of course. I have also checked what might cause the error. See: > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q196069 > I can also say that I have tried to use the pure Win32 LoadLibrary call > on the resulting dlls, and the results are consistent with the dlopen > results. My guess is that there is something wrong inside the dll, that > causes a segfault during dlopen/LoadLibrary. >> I cannot believe that it depends on the name of a DLL whether it can >> be dlopened or not. > Me neither, yet the name appears to be significant in some way. Then it is a bug in dlltool or dllwrap and I wonder why this never was fixed. >> There must be another error with your test! >> >> Consider this (with source from your first posting): >> $ gcc -shared -o pseudo_stubs.dll foo.c >> $ gcc -o load load.c >> $ ./load >> pseudo_stubs.dll ok >> foo.dll dlopen: Win32 error 126 >> $ cp pseudo_stubs.dll foo.dll >> $ ./load >> pseudo_stubs.dll ok >> foo.dll ok > Hey, that doesn't explain anything. It's like answering someones awk bug > report with "see, it works with sed, your test must be wrong". Apart > from that, thanks for the example, the project now uses "gcc -shared" > with apparent success. So for me, this problem is now academic. That is what I wanted to achieve with this example. > I'm not saying that it is the name of the dll that is causing the > problem. If I build the dll as foo.dll with dlltool/dllwrap and rename > it to pseudo_stubs.dll, pseudo_stubs.dll works. Also, if I build the dll > as pseudo_stubs.dll and rename it foo.dll, foo.dll doesn't work. > I'd say that there is some sort of problem in dlltool/dllwrap. Please > enlighten me if I'm using them incorrectly. Seems to be really a bug. > Can someone also please say if they get error 998 for the example in the > original post, or if that happens on my machine only. Indeed I get the same error and it works if I use foo instead of pseudo_stubs, maybe it is really the underscore? Since the -shared switch for gcc works pretty well and since then, dlltool and dllwrap are kind of deprecated, it is up to you to figure out what is wrong with dlltool/dllwrap and fix it if you really need it. Gerrit -- =^..^= -- 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/
