Re: LoadLibrary error 487 (was Re: Please test latest developer snapshot)

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Feb 28 16:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:20:21PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Feb 28 21:15, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> On Feb 28 14:49, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:01:46AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> > >(*) Actually I tried to reproduce the problem on Windows NT4, 2000, XP,
> >> > >    2003, 2008, and W7.  Only XP was affected at all.
> >> > 
> >> > I tried to reproduce on most of those and saw nothing too.  I just don't
> >> > know what situation this will crop up in.  We don't check specifically
> >> > for XP so we may be introducing weird hard-to-diagnose behavior.
> >> > 
> >> > All strange behavior would be guaranteed gone if we loaded the DLL
> >> > statically.  I wonder if we loaded the DLL statically and only removed
> >> > on symbol from the autoload if it would help with any slowness in
> >> > linking since we'd still be linking all of the symbols dynamically.
> >> 
> >> This speaks against loading winmm statically:
> >> 
> >> http://www.tech-archive.net/Archive/DotNet/microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.clr/2007-02/msg00000.html
> >> 
> >> Why not test for XP specificailly and be done with it?
> >
> >Like this:
> 
> I have something like that sitting in my sandbox but I named the flag
> "use_dont_resolve_hack".  Actually "need_dont_resolve_hack" would
> probably be better.
> 
> But, at this point, it's nickel and dime so whatever you want to
> call it is fine.

"use_dont_resolve_hack" is fine with me.  If you check it in tonight,
I'll create 1.7.8 from there tomorrow morning.

> Thanks.
> 
> (And, btw, I made dll_load explicity inline)

Yep, I just saw that.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat