Updated cygwin dlls cause unnecessary reboot on NT
Larry Hall (Cygwin)
Tue Dec 26 11:14:00 GMT 2006
On 12/25/2006, Linda Walsh wrote:
> FWIW, I have replaced the libs like cygwin1.dll, cygintl?.dll...
> and such while cygwin is running and not had a catastrophe as one might have
> trying to overwrite/update the memory image of a kernel dynamically, so I
> don't think it's quite all the end of the world you make it out to be. But
> I admit it doesn't sound clean.
It's more than that regardless of your (lucky) experiences. It is that
way for a reason, whether or not you know or understand it. However, if
your short-cut works well for you in your usage, more power to you. It
can't be advocated as a general solution for cygwin1.dll though.
It's also worthwhile to note that the Cygwin web site still states that
"The Cygwin DLL works with all non-beta, non "release candidate", ix86 32
bit versions of Windows since Windows 95, with the exception of Windows CE."
So regardless of how XP and later platforms may handle DLL replacements,
'setup.exe' still needs to handle the cases prior to the more advanced
techniques you mention. For now, that means 'setup.exe' works as it
always has, until someone offers a patch to make it more discriminating.
That someone could be you! ;-)
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin