Re: static vs. shared linking

[David Stacey <drstacey at tiscali dot co dot uk>]

On 31/03/15 10:05, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 30 20:15, David Stacey wrote:
> > Back to the matter in hand - I don't suppose you had thoughts on why my
> > simple application crashes when linked as shared, but works fine when linked
> > statically?
> No, sorry.  This may be a c++11 thingy which requires "something" in
> libstdc++ and Cygwin, but I don't know what that could be.  It's
> especially weird that free() aborts.  This points to some malloc/free
> inconsistency, as if the malloc (or new) call used another
> implementation of malloc than the aborting free call.  It may also
> be a memory overflow issue but that would show up on other platforms
> as well.

Thanks for your reply. Ah well, worth a try. I'm going to keep plugging 
away at this. My next goal is to produce a C++ example that doesn't 
require the STL, and after that maybe an example in plain C. Reducing 
the amount of code and eliminating number dependencies should help us 
see what's going on more clearly.

I'll post back here if and when I make more progress.

Dave.


--
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