RE: REAL Problem building GCC on Cygwin on Vista

["Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>]

On 20 August 2007 17:42, Aaron Gray wrote:

>> On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:

>>>   BTW, you didn't by any chance use winzip to unpack the tarball did you?
> 
> No.

  Just checking.  Windoze tools don't generally do the right thing for
cygwin's emulation of posix perms.

>> Apart from that, the file permission settings are the same in Vista
>> compared to older OSes.  The exception is the UAC stuff which could
>> result in some executables having less permissions than usual, if, for
>> instance, Internet Explorer has been used to download the executable.
>> We can hopefully rule this out here, so it's just some permission
>> problem which has nothing to do with the base OS.

  I want to throw an AYS in Corinna's general direction here... one of the
ongoing problems in 'doze security since waaaay back when is that the default
perms for user-created files, the equivalent of the default umask under posix,
have always been pretty wide open: AYS they haven't been tightened up for
Vista?

> Works fine on XP. The only things that are diferent are the Cygwin
> instillation and Vista.

  Heh, so that's a bit like saying "The only things that are different are
everything, apart from the gcc source code".

> Unmodified GCC 4.2.0 compiles okay, but when modified cracks appear, only on
> Vista though, XP is okay. So must be something to do with permissions.

  So, what tool did you use to 'modify' it?


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


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