On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 05:21:57PM -0000, Max Bowsher wrote: >Problem: If it was Cygwin, it couldn't use any other Cygwin dll - like >cygpopt-0.dll (it might need to rebase them). >It's somewhat an unanswered question whether rebasing cygwin1.dll is >necessary/useful/harmful.
Necessary? Unlikely. Useful? In some cases, maybe. Harmful? No. If it is, it's a bug. >IMO, we already have strace & cygcheck that don't do Cygwin paths. I really think that a general purpose utility like rebase, which could be used repeatedly (as opposed to occasionally for debugging purposes), should be a cygwin program. Linking libraries statically should solve the problem of attempting to rebase a 'linked in' DLL. cgf
