Re: CT 0.29 - stuck compiling gcc 4.0 glibc 2.2.5 ppc405: execvp:/bin/sh: Resource temporarily unavailable

[Martin Egholm Nielsen <martin at egholm-nielsen dot dk>]

Hi Christopher,

> > > /cygdrive/X is what cygwin uses to more-or-less reference unmounted
> > > drives.  You wouldn't use that in the second argument to mount.  If you
>
>            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > inspect the man page you'll see examples of how to use mount, and you'll
> > > see that /cygdrive is not used in this fashion.

> > I mounted the directories given below:
> >
> > c:\cygwin\opt\crosstool on /opt/crosstool type system (binmode,cygexec)
> > c:\DATA\crosstool-0.29 on /cygdrive/c/DATA/crosstool-0.29 type system 
>
>                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > (binmode,cygexec)
> >
> > But then, after doing so, running CT (and possible some other apps.), I
> > got an error-dialog on the screen that cygwin1.dll could be found in
> > the path.  Although "/bin" was in the path, I then had to add
> > "/cygdrive/c/cygwin/bin" to the path, then it worked...  Weird!?

> So, you quoted the part of my mail where I said not to do that, did it
> anyway, and then think it's weird that things don't work.
>
> Do not use /cygdrive as the target of a mount command.
So now, I dropped the /cygdrive part of the second argument :-)
So my mounts are as seen here:

$ mount
c:\cygwin\opt\crosstool on /opt/crosstool type system (binmode,cygexec)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
C:\cygwin\lib on /usr/lib type system (textmode)
c:\cygwin\bin on /bin type system (binmode,cygexec)
c:\cygwin\bin on /usr/bin type system (binmode,cygexec)
c:\cygwin\x on /x type system (binmode,cygexec)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
C:\cygwin on / type system (textmode)
c: on /cygdrive/c type system (textmode,noumount)

But again I get the error message "Could not find cygwin1.dll in path: 
..." whenever I try to execute a binary ".exe" in either of the two 
newly mounted directories.

Maybe, just maybe :-), this may be because some of the binaries were 
build back when the "mount -X" directoties weren't added?!

// Martin


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com