make-w32
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

GNU make 3.81, Windows port [resend]


From: Aronsky, Pavel
Subject: GNU make 3.81, Windows port [resend]
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:22:49 +0300

Good time of day!
 
We were having some issues with our makefiles, which are actually caused by our setup
in Windows ( too long path, too big environment size).
 
While investigating this I've looked into the sources of make v. 3.81 for Windows (built with the included  VS 2003 project )
and found something I couldn't understand...
 
1.  process_begin() and find_file()  in  w32\subproc\sub_proc.c
 
Function find_file() uses a deprecated API OpenFile to find an executable file.
OpenFile has 128 chars limit of file path.  
When the executable path is longer than 128 chars,  find_file either fails to find the file, or opens it
and returns success --  but the file name filled in OFSTRUCT is  somewhat  unusable.
When later process_begin() calls CreateProcess, it takes this (bogus) file name from OFSTRUCT and crashes.
 
I am still investigating when exactly either of these cases happens. There are several cases
when the filename is resolved from %PATH% or is relative or absolute.
In all cases when we have failures of CreateProcess.
 
Now, the single purpose of find_file() is to open the "executable" file and check if it is a shell script.
But find_file() does not look for the exact given file name (without extension) - which can be a shell script.
Also it does not test for "known" exts like ".pl", ".sh" and so on.
Instead it attempts to open and read EXE files... this IMHO should be fixed.
 
IMHO something should be done with find_file function: either fix it using modern win32 APIs (SearchPath etc) instead of OpenFile,
and recognize "executable" extensions - or remove it completely as a dead code.
 
2. The thread body functions have wrong attribute

In  w32\subproc\sub_proc.c thread body functions: proc_stdin_thread, proc_stdout_thread etc are now used with _beginthreadex instead of _beginthread.

So they must be explicitly declared __stdcall instead of _cdecl ( default of MSVC ); and typecast in their usages should be removed ( in process_pipe_io).

However I could not test this fix, these functions were never called in my test cases.

 

If somebody is interested in the changes for w32\subproc\sub_proc.c, as described above, I'll send my mods.

I run with these patches, but have not enough resources and experience for proper testing.

 

With best regards, keep the good work going

Regards,
 
Pavel Aronsky 
Engineer
Intel - BWDi
 
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Eli Zaretskii [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Tue, Aug 01, 2006 20:30
To: Aronsky, Pavel
Subject: Re: Do you develop GNU make?
 
> Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 19:25:55 +0300
> From: "Aronsky, Pavel" <
address@hidden>

> We have some issues with the Windows port. However we are not familiar with GNU procedures of submitting bugs, so we'd rather find somebody who actively maintains Windows port of gnumake and ask them to look at these issues.
>
> Are you still developing the make, or could you suggest somebody else?
 
I'm helping Paul D. Smith, the official maintainer of GNU Make, to
maintain the Windows port.  I'm doing this on my own free time (which
is very limited), so no promises.
 
The procedure of submitting a bug report is very simple: if the
problem is specific to the Windows port, send an email message to
address@hidden, state your version of Make, what commands you issued
and what problems you experienced.  It is best to send the shortest
Makefile that could be used to reproduce the problem(s).  It is also
advisable to describe what compiler and development environment were
used to build Make, or, if you downloaded a precompiled binary, where
did you get it.
 
That's it!  There are a few other people who read the make-w32 mailing
list, so the chance of getting fast and efficient help is quite high.
 
(I assume you are using the latest version 3.81 of Make; if not, try
upgrading to it first, perhaps the problem(s) will disappear.)
~~~~~~~~
 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]