rebaseall failure/perlrebase conflict?

rebaseall failure/perlrebase conflict?

[Matthias Andree]

Trying to run rebase fails for me. It rebases a truckload full of dlls,  
then:

/usr/lib/parrot/2.3.0/dynext/rational.dll: new base = 5f640000, new size =  
20000
/usr/lib/parrot/2.3.0/dynext/subproxy.dll: new base = 5f620000, new size =  
20000
ReBaseImage  
(/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10/i686-cygwin/auto/Image/Magick/Magick.dll)  
failed with last error = 6

And sure enough, no write permission on the file (I had previously run)

$ ls -l  
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10/i686-cygwin/auto/Image/Magick/Magick.dll
-r-xr-xr-x 1 mandree root 284686 2010-05-03 16:14  
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10/i686-cygwin/auto/Image/Magick/Magick.dll

#1 why would rebaseall fail here? perlrebase succeeds, and peflags either  
doesn't touch this, or doesn't fail either.

#2 I'm a bit worried that I am the owner rather than "Administrator", I  
guess this is an artifact of the Win7 UAC.

I had started a CMD.EXE as administrator and launched ash there.

$ uname -a
CYGWIN_NT-6.1 COMPUTER 1.7.5(0.225/5/3) 2010-04-12 19:07 i686 Cygwin

(The whole story started when - again - after an upgrade "git svn rebase"  
would fail loading Perl DLLs to the same address. This is a nuisance.)

-- 
Matthias Andree

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Q: rebaseall/rebaseperl ?

[Cyrille Lefevre]

Hi,

any reasons why rebaseall and rebase perl aren't executed at compile 
time ? or at packaging time ?

Regards,

Cyrille Lefevre
-- 
mailto:Cyrille.Lefevre-lists@laposte.net


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Re: Q: rebaseall/rebaseperl ?

[Matthias Andree]

Am 05.07.2010, 23:09 Uhr, schrieb Cyrille Lefevre:

>
> Hi,
>
> any reasons why rebaseall and rebase perl aren't executed at compile  
> time ? or at packaging time ?

Probably because it's not possible to oversee which installation would  
need which libraries later, and because you'd have to have a registry, or  
algorithm to derive base addresses, for each and every potential library.   
Meaning: not manageable with reasonable effort.

-- 
Matthias Andree

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Re: Q: rebaseall/rebaseperl ?

[Eliot Moss]

On 7/5/2010 5:22 PM, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Am 05.07.2010, 23:09 Uhr, schrieb Cyrille Lefevre:

>> any reasons why rebaseall and rebase perl aren't executed at compile
>> time ? or at packaging time ?
>
> Probably because it's not possible to oversee which installation would
> need which libraries later, and because you'd have to have a registry,
> or algorithm to derive base addresses, for each and every potential
> library. Meaning: not manageable with reasonable effort.

Put another way, the exact addresses and spacing needed vary
with platform and perhaps according to other stuff installed,
so it would be hard to do in advance.  It *might* be possible
to do it as part of setup on an individual platform, i.e.,
*technically* feasible, but I expect it would be *managerially*
a nightmare, since it is a somewhat complicated thing that
gives people more room to screw up ...

Regards -- Eliot

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Re: Q: rebaseall/rebaseperl ?

[Reini Urban]

Eliot Moss schrieb:
> On 7/5/2010 5:22 PM, Matthias Andree wrote:
>> Am 05.07.2010, 23:09 Uhr, schrieb Cyrille Lefevre:
>
>>> any reasons why rebaseall and rebase perl aren't executed at compile
>>> time ? or at packaging time ?

It IS done at packaging time on XP, and tested on Win7

At install-time a rebaseall would be preferred, since we packagers do 
not know how many dlls the client has installed, esp. those which might 
clash.

perlrebase is mainly useful, if a full rebaseall is too large, and/or 
another perl has to be rebased, which CAN conflict with the default perl.

>> Probably because it's not possible to oversee which installation would
>> need which libraries later, and because you'd have to have a registry,
>> or algorithm to derive base addresses, for each and every potential
>> library. Meaning: not manageable with reasonable effort.
>
> Put another way, the exact addresses and spacing needed vary
> with platform and perhaps according to other stuff installed,
> so it would be hard to do in advance. It *might* be possible
> to do it as part of setup on an individual platform, i.e.,
> *technically* feasible, but I expect it would be *managerially*
> a nightmare, since it is a somewhat complicated thing that
> gives people more room to screw up ...

Jason explictily listed TODO's in his rebase package README.
A setup database to skip already know addresses and rebase new ones into 
the holes or at the end is TODO.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://phpwiki.org/  http://murbreak.at/

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple