This is the mail archive of the cygwin@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: cygwin with sockscap32




Robert Collins wrote:
> 
> Madhu,

> I have seen many occasions where software vendors have to release new
> versions of their product when an O/S patch occurs because _they broke
> the rules writing it_. Cygwin 1.1.x has the same ABI as cygwin b20. Most
> ports for B20 run just fine under the current cygwin because cygwin has
> been carefully kept backwarsds compatible. 

Not entirely true.  executables would work on both B20 and v1.1.x, but
objects and libraries had to be recompiled.

> Occams razor suggests that
> this is just another case of a corner cutting software vendor. 

Yep -- they "make assumptions about the application and stack
implementations".  It seems these assumptions were valid for B20
cygwin1.dll and B20 executables, but not for V1.1.x cygwin1.dll and
V1.1.x executables.

> The
> sockscap made use of an unsupported API or ABI feature, and as such is
> now broken.

Not really.  sockscap doesn't link to cygwin, nor does it run under the
cygwin "platform".  It modifies the behavior of the windows networking
stack -- in ways that are apparently incompatible with the cygwin-1.1.x
networking implementation.

> 
> Of course, it might be a cygwin problem, in which case...
> 
> YOU have the cygwin source. YOU are observing the problem in a closed
> source product, YOU need to liase with the software vendor.

Yep.

--Chuck

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]