This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Large-Address awareness on 64 bit systems
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:31:23 +0200
- Subject: Re: Large-Address awareness on 64 bit systems
- References: <20110618201724.GP3437@calimero.vinschen.de> <1308468291.1656.13.camel@YAAKOV04> <20110619080941.GR3437@calimero.vinschen.de> <1309229536.6596.31.camel@YAAKOV04> <1310443832.8576.29.camel@YAAKOV04>
- Reply-to: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
On Jul 11 23:10, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 21:52 -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > I have also been getting SIGABRT from throwing exceptions
> > across C++ DLLs, with GDB pointing to RtlUpdateClonedSRWLock() in ntdll,
> > but I was seeing that sometimes before this as well. (This is with
> > 1.7.9; recent snapshots haven't been working for me but I haven't had
> > the time to track down why.)
>
> I've managed to narrow this down somewhat. With Ports' gcc-4.5.3 built
> with binutils-2.21, libstdc++6 and libgcj11 break wrt throwing
> exceptions if rebased *above* their natural ImageBases (IOW the ones
> they were created with at link time), but not if rebased to a lower
> address.
That sounds weird.
> Purely speculation at this point, but I have to wonder if this is
> somehow left over from a previous problem with libstdc++6, where it
> completely broke if rebased at all:
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-12/msg00080.html
Maybe somebody on the binutils list has a clue?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat