Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 5:26 am, Dr. Wayne Keen wrote: [Post on [EMAIL PROTECTED]] > I know I have run into problems a couple of times with programs that > have windows installers that somehow like to assume that you don't > already have Cygwin on your machine. > > The first time I installed Octave, it replaced my Cygwin with some > minimal installation it needed to support itself. > > Something not as severe happended when I ran an Windows installation > program for Ruby. > > EventuallyI learned to just go ahead and build things myself > within Cygwin. The main reason I stopped distributing the original version of my Minimal Cygwin-XFree86 for XDMCP only install was my gradual (and slightly belated) understanding of this problem. And it was only because of discussions on the cygwin-xfree mailing list that I discovered this problem at all. Personally, I think the requirement for there to be only a *single* cygwin1.dll needs to be *far* more strongly emphasised on the Cygwin website, in somewhere prominent (like on http://www.cygwin.com/index.html). As the porting of open-source software from Linux/Unix to Windows becomes more common, unless things change this problem is only going to get worse. The problem here is that many developers are going to want to distribute their program Windows ports via a Windows installer, not via Setup.exe. And they are going to want their program to install as transparently as possible, so they are going to provide their own copy of the cygwin1.dll on the assumption that the user probably wont already have one. This is generally true currently, but will become less true as time goes by. I know that the Windows port of MySQL relies on the cygwin1.dll. And in my wanderings I have seen several others (Ruby and Octave are mentioned above). It is no good if each program puts the cygwin1.dll in it own directory, since if two of the programs are running at the same time there may be problems. It is even worse if they all try and put it in system directory, since then who knows what version you will end up with. And regardless of what happens, if the user either has or later installs Cygwin via Setup.exe there will be problems. The only long term solution that I can think of is to make it possible (perhaps it already is) for the Windows installer to use an automated version of Setup.exe, that without any interaction from the user (unless absolutely necessary) will install or update (if required) the cygwin1.dll in a Setup.exe compatible way. That way, if I install program A which depends on the cygwin1.dll, and then install program B (which has an older version of cygwin1.dll) it just leaves the newer version there. If I then install program C which requires a newer version, the dll is then updated by the automated setup.exe. If I then install Cygwin via Setup.exe, it just notices that I already have the cygwin1.dll and only updates it if necessary. I think that basically what would be required would be to enable Setup.exe to be controlled by a config file (similar to a RedHat kickstart file), and have its GUI not displayed unless there was a problem and user interaction was required. The other thing required is education. Existing projects that use the cygwin1.dll need to be informed of the issue and encouraged (gently) to help do something about it. And the information about the conflicting dll problem needs to be much more 'in the face' of potential cygwin1.dll users. No doubt, ideally all cygwin based programs should be installed via Setup.exe, and then the problem goes away. Realistically, that is not going to happen. 'Ordinary' Windows users (as opposed to cygwin users) like Windows installers. And when programs that use the cygwin1.dll start crashing randomly due to multiple cygwin1.dll copies, Joe Windows User will simply see an open source program failing to work, and decide that he will stay with closed source programs after all. That is what concerns me the most. Anyway, that is my 2 cents on the issue. Perhaps this has already been discussed in depth before and/or is already implemented or in the process of being implemented, and if so my apologies if I'm wasting bandwidth. I'm not subscribed to the cygwin list, only cygwin-xfree. I'm CC'ing the cygwin list, since I think it is fundamentally a cygwin issue, not an Cygwin-XFree issue, although of course it effects anything that depends on cygwin. > So, one message that probably should leak out is to avoid Windows > binaries that mention anything about Cygwin. :-) I would be inclined to check anything that was developed on Unix/Linux first and then ported to Windows, even if they fail to mention Cygwin, and even if it is closed source. But perhaps I'm just paranoid. ;-) Rasjid.
Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
I know I have run into problems a couple of times with programs that have windows installers that somehow like to assume that you don't already have Cygwin on your machine. The first time I installed Octave, it replaced my Cygwin with some minimal installation it needed to support itself. Something not as severe happended when I ran an Windows installation program for Ruby. EventuallyI learned to just go ahead and build things myself within Cygwin. So, one message that probably should leak out is to avoid Windows binaries that mention anything about Cygwin. :-) Wayne Keen
Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
Nicholas Wourms wrote: > If I'm not mistaken, I believe WinCVS does tell them to put the dll in > system. If so, then they should be vigorously insulted, and possibly shunned. Think of the frenchmen in "Monty Python's The Holy Grail". However, I can't find anything prominent on their site that says "put cygwin1.dll in naughty places". --Chuck
Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
--- Charles Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Harold L Hunt wrote: > > > > > Hey, go easy on yourself. Most users like to argue with us about how > they > > don't have a second copy of cygwin1.dll on their system. After a few > rounds > > they end up finally doing the search and, lo!, they find a second copy > of > > cygwin1.dll. You should be commended for not arguing and instead > doing the > > What I'd like to know, is how all of these users ended up with > cygwin1.dll in /system in the first place. They all claim that they > didn't do it themselves; or perhaps they did do it themselves, > "following instructions a long time ago" [strange that the bug only > cropped up "now" ] -- but who is telling people to do this? > > Is there some program out there that uses cygwin, and installs > cygwin1.dll into /system? Is there some website out there that tells > people to do this? Can we hunt them down and flame them with vigour? Chuck, If I'm not mistaken, I believe WinCVS does tell them to put the dll in system. Cheers, Nicholas __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
Harold L Hunt wrote: > > Hey, go easy on yourself. Most users like to argue with us about how they > don't have a second copy of cygwin1.dll on their system. After a few rounds > they end up finally doing the search and, lo!, they find a second copy of > cygwin1.dll. You should be commended for not arguing and instead doing the What I'd like to know, is how all of these users ended up with cygwin1.dll in /system in the first place. They all claim that they didn't do it themselves; or perhaps they did do it themselves, "following instructions a long time ago" [strange that the bug only cropped up "now" ] -- but who is telling people to do this? Is there some program out there that uses cygwin, and installs cygwin1.dll into /system? Is there some website out there that tells people to do this? Can we hunt them down and flame them with vigour? --Chuck
RE: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
Sanford, > You are ABSOLUTELY correct! I found another copy in /winnt/system. I deleted > that one and, yes, it does work just fine with cygwin1.dll version 1.13.12-1 > in \cygwin\bin. Great! > Sorry for causing trouble because of my own stupidity! Hey, go easy on yourself. Most users like to argue with us about how they don't have a second copy of cygwin1.dll on their system. After a few rounds they end up finally doing the search and, lo!, they find a second copy of cygwin1.dll. You should be commended for not arguing and instead doing the search right from the start. :) Harold
RE: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
You are ABSOLUTELY correct! I found another copy in /winnt/system. I deleted that one and, yes, it does work just fine with cygwin1.dll version 1.13.12-1 in \cygwin\bin. Sorry for causing trouble because of my own stupidity! Sandy -Original Message- From: Harold L Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 1:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS) Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree Sanford, Do a search for `cygwin1.dll' on your system using the Windows file search utility. Tell us (at [EMAIL PROTECTED]) how many copies you find. Harold "Zelkovitz, Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Actually, when it fails, it does not generate an Xwin.log file. It > does, however, generate numerous stackdump files. Attached are ones > that were generated with the cygwin1.dll version 1.13.12-1. I also > included a script which I use to get things started. > > Thanks, > Sandy > > > > -Original Message- > From: Harold L Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS); '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree > > > Sanford, > > We are not aware of any problems with Cygwin/XFree86 on the latest > versions of cygwin1.dll. In fact, I've been running Cygwin/XFree86 > all day on 1.3.12-2 without any problems, whatsoever. > > Send in your /tmp/XWin.log file and we will tell you if it has any > relevant information. > > Thanks, > > Harold > > "Zelkovitz, Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > said: > > > > > The last two version of cygwin1.dll ( 1.13.12 and 1.13.11 ) seem not > > to work with the xfree release code. It appears that the code fails > > when run under the list DLLs. If I switch back to the version prior to > > 1.13.11, all works as advertised. Does anyone else have the same > > problem? Does anyone know if a patch exists to allow the xfree code to > > run under the latest cygwin1.dll? > > > > > > > > Sanford Zelkovitz (ZeroChaos) > > EDS - GWH Web Engineering > > 750 Tower Dr, M/C 5291 > > Troy, MI 48098 > > > > * phone: +01-248-265-2277 (8-365) > > * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.eds.com > > > > > > > > > > > >
RE: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
Sanford, Do a search for `cygwin1.dll' on your system using the Windows file search utility. Tell us (at [EMAIL PROTECTED]) how many copies you find. Harold "Zelkovitz, Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Actually, when it fails, it does not generate an Xwin.log file. It does, > however, generate > numerous stackdump files. Attached are ones that were generated with the > cygwin1.dll version 1.13.12-1. I also included a script which I use to get > things started. > > Thanks, > Sandy > > > > -Original Message- > From: Harold L Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS); '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree > > > Sanford, > > We are not aware of any problems with Cygwin/XFree86 on the latest versions > of cygwin1.dll. In fact, I've been running Cygwin/XFree86 all day on > 1.3.12-2 without any problems, whatsoever. > > Send in your /tmp/XWin.log file and we will tell you if it has any relevant > information. > > Thanks, > > Harold > > "Zelkovitz, Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > > The last two version of cygwin1.dll ( 1.13.12 and 1.13.11 ) seem not > > to work with the xfree release code. It appears that the code fails > > when run under the list DLLs. If I switch back to the version prior to > > 1.13.11, all works as advertised. Does anyone else have the same > > problem? Does anyone know if a patch exists to allow the xfree code to > > run under the latest cygwin1.dll? > > > > > > > > Sanford Zelkovitz (ZeroChaos) > > EDS - GWH Web Engineering > > 750 Tower Dr, M/C 5291 > > Troy, MI 48098 > > > > * phone: +01-248-265-2277 (8-365) > > * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.eds.com > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
Sanford, We are not aware of any problems with Cygwin/XFree86 on the latest versions of cygwin1.dll. In fact, I've been running Cygwin/XFree86 all day on 1.3.12-2 without any problems, whatsoever. Send in your /tmp/XWin.log file and we will tell you if it has any relevant information. Thanks, Harold "Zelkovitz, Sanford J (ZERO CHAOS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > The last two version of cygwin1.dll ( 1.13.12 and 1.13.11 ) seem not to work > with the xfree release code. It appears that the code fails when run under > the list DLLs. If I switch back to the version prior to 1.13.11, all works > as advertised. Does anyone else have the same problem? Does anyone know if a > patch exists to allow the xfree code to run under the latest cygwin1.dll? > > > > Sanford Zelkovitz (ZeroChaos) > EDS - GWH Web Engineering > 750 Tower Dr, M/C 5291 > Troy, MI 48098 > > * phone: +01-248-265-2277 (8-365) > * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.eds.com > > > >
Problem with cygwin1.dll and xfree
The last two version of cygwin1.dll ( 1.13.12 and 1.13.11 ) seem not to work with the xfree release code. It appears that the code fails when run under the list DLLs. If I switch back to the version prior to 1.13.11, all works as advertised. Does anyone else have the same problem? Does anyone know if a patch exists to allow the xfree code to run under the latest cygwin1.dll? Sanford Zelkovitz (ZeroChaos) EDS - GWH Web Engineering 750 Tower Dr, M/C 5291 Troy, MI 48098 * phone: +01-248-265-2277 (8-365) * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.eds.com
