multiple cygwin1.dll message

Sat May 26 06:14:00 GMT 2007

Thanks for the reply, responses in the text below. For
some conciseness, I'll cut out parts of my original

Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> * John (Fri, 25 May 2007 13:07:23 -0400)
>> I just upgraded cygwin after leaving it dormant
>> for about 2 years. It was working properly before,
>> but now things are broken.
> Two years without updates? Now that's severely broken...

Yeah, I haven't bothered much with UNIX on my desktop
since my main machines were Solaris and linux until
recently. I have a MacBook but need to migrate a
ton of software off Windows, much of it which can't
unless I get "parallels". This programming project
arose because of the need to reformat a Windows flat
data file. I may have to fall back to copying the data
to MacOS X, running the script under UNIX, and copying
the results back to Windows. Sigh.

>> I got the multiple cygwin1.dll message, actually
>> pointing to c:\windows\system32\cygwin1.dll . But
>> that file is not there! I did a Windows find, and
>> suggests running in cygwin:
>> ===
>> cygcheck -s -v -r > check.txt
>> and open the generated file check.txt in your favorite text editor. 
> Actually you shouldn't post the file as /attachment/ here...
>> Search keyword "warning" in the document. Especially, if you find line:
>> Warning: There are multiple cygwin1.dlls on your path
>> ===
> And it doesn't say where the other ones are?

Nope. Isn't that special! But cygwin's upgrade says where it thinks
it is and it isn't.  The check.txt file is attached.

>> Indeed, I found the warning in the output, but I am hesitant
>> to remove things from the path because it may break other
>> installed software.
> It's your software. You installed it there. So you should know what's 
> in there. Anyway: simply removing an element from the path doesn't 
> "break" anything - you just have to type the full name. You don't have 
> to have any Cygwin knowledge for that - basic Windows and Unix 
> knowledge is enough for that.

I'm not convinced that it is harmless. e.g. I have a CAD program
installed and it is in the path. It may need that to locate
configuration or setup files. If I remove it all, and it doesn't
work or breaks something, I have to worry about typos when I put
it back in. Too many blanks, quotes, etc., to do it frivolously.
Wouldn't be a problem on UNIX where I could save a config file
and put it back...

>> In the cygcheck output above, I also see a number of Warnings about
>> g77, like:
>> Warning: C:\cygwin\bin\gcc.exe hides c:\g77\bin\gcc.exe
>> are they of any concern?
> Is that a serious question? Why do you install two compilers?! You 
> /must/ have already noticed that one of them is not what you used to 
> get when you type gcc. If you don't need them uninstall them both.

I don't remember why I have g77 installed. As I recall, it might have
been added as a cygwin package, but can't recall for sure. And not
having cygwin experience, it doesn't just jump out at me.

And it is a serious question. Full blown UNIX machines which I and my
staff have run, are capable of having installed multiple packages,
even multiple versions, with no ill effect. Windows still suffers
from being designed as a single user operating system, unlike UNIX
which was designed as a true multiuser and multitasking operating
system. Things trip over each other all the time. Sigh.

Currently, I need the Bourne shell. But I want gcc and g77 later.

I am successfully using a Bourne shell script from Windows, but it
is very wounded. After running the script a few time, I get can't
forks, and Zone Alarm shuts down and starts up. Then I have to
reboot to get a couple of more successful script runs. Quit annoying
to someone used to scripting on Solaris.

I guess tomorrow I have a look to see if g77 can be removed, and
have a shot at killing the PATH (ugh!). Any other ideas are welcome.

Thanks, John

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list