On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 11:42:00PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>maybe I'll find some time to take it over...
You'd hardly be mean if you actually took over maintainership.
It's far meaner to send a "me too" about problems you've noticed without
actually doing anything whatsoever.
cgf
--
Unsubscri
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 09:15:49PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
Hallo Christopher,
Am Mittwoch, 11. August 2004 um 17:50 schriebst du:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:45:59PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
Then it is a bug in dlltool or dllwrap and I wonder why this never was
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 09:15:49PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>Hallo Christopher,
>Am Mittwoch, 11. August 2004 um 17:50 schriebst du:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:45:59PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>>>Then it is a bug in dlltool or dllwrap and I wonder why this never was
>>>fixed.
>
>>Surel
Hallo Christopher,
Am Mittwoch, 11. August 2004 um 17:50 schriebst du:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:45:59PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>>Then it is a bug in dlltool or dllwrap and I wonder why this never was
>>fixed.
> Surely you know why. We leave bugs in the code just to make people
> suff
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:45:59PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>Then it is a bug in dlltool or dllwrap and I wonder why this never was
>fixed.
Surely you know why. We leave bugs in the code just to make people
suffer.
WJM,
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
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
Peter Ekberg wrote:
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 myse
> > 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 my
Hallo Peter,
Am Dienstag, 10. August 2004 um 22:58 schriebst du:
> I wrote:
>> Reid Thompson wrote:
>> > well -- i just redid the entire thing, with the correct spelling and
>> > your original post works
>> >
>> > $ ./load
>> > pseudo_stub.dll ok
>> > foo.dll ok
>>
>> That's strange, did my ori
I wrote:
> Reid Thompson wrote:
> > well -- i just redid the entire thing, with the correct spelling and
> > your original post works
> >
> > $ ./load
> > pseudo_stub.dll ok
> > foo.dll ok
>
> That's strange, did my original post first get you error 998 for
> pseudo_stubs.dll and now, after some
Reid Thompson wrote:
> well -- i just redid the entire thing, with the correct spelling and
> your original post works
>
> $ ./load
> pseudo_stub.dll ok
> foo.dll ok
That's strange, did my original post first get you error 998 for
pseudo_stubs.dll and now, after some juggling, the same thing i
IL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Dynamic loading of cygwin dependent dlls
>
>
> Reid Thompson wrote:
> > take the underscore out of the dll name
> >
> > psuedo_stub -> psuedostub
>
> Yes, that works. It also works if I add an s making it
> pseudo_s
bs.dll",
> NULL
> };
and all works
reid
> -Original Message-
> From: Reid Thompson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 3:57 PM
> To: Reid Thompson; Peter Ekberg; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Dynamic loading of cygwin dependent dlls
>
>
> actually
printf("ok\n");
}
return 0;
}
RESULTS-RESULTS
pseudostubs.dll dlopen: Win32 error 126
foo.dll ok
psuedostubs.dll ok
reid
> -Original Message-
> From: Reid Thompson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 3:49 PM
> To: Peter Ekberg; [EMAIL PROTEC
take the underscore out of the dll name
psuedo_stub -> psuedostub
reid
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Ekberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 3:11 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Dynamic loading of cygwin dependent dlls
&
Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 09:09:40AM +0200, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>>I have read several messages stating that dlopen does not work for
dlls
>>that depend on cygwin1.dll.
>>(e.g. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2004-06/msg01056.html).
>>I have also understood that this is
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 09:09:40AM +0200, Peter Ekberg wrote:
>I have read several messages stating that dlopen does not work for dlls
>that depend on cygwin1.dll.
>(e.g. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2004-06/msg01056.html).
>I have also understood that this is due to some structures not bein
Hello!
I have read several messages stating that dlopen does not work for dlls
that depend on cygwin1.dll.
(e.g. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2004-06/msg01056.html).
I have also understood that this is due to some structures not being
initialized in that case.
Is this dlopen problem limite
18 matches
Mail list logo
