Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:20:07 -0500 From: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@crodrigues.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Release criteria for libkse -> libpthread switch? Message-ID: <20040108012007.GA38122@crodrigues.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040107115941.6394G-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <20040107070442.GB34511@crodrigues.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040107115941.6394G-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:03:59PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: > I'm not sure there's a specific documented set of criteria at this point, OK, well let's start putting all our cards on the table, and see what we get. :) > other than that the issue probably got addressed too late in the 5.2 > release process. Well 5.2 has branched, and let's assume that it will be released shortly after the appropriate QA and bugfixing. Are there any issues that would prevent moving to KSE as the default on -current at this very moment, since 5.2 is on its own branch? > There are a number of running concerns, including: > > (1) Avoid building a binary library name dependency into all the pre-built > packages we distribute. Can you explain this? I don't fully understand. > Also, resolve any lasting concerns about how > build processes should say "And I want threads, dammit". This seems to be a point of debate, but it would be nice to resolve this sooner rather than later. My opinion is to do the following: - move libkse to libpthread - inform users that they must use -lpthread link in thread support - remove -pthread in gcc (maybe deprecate it instead) - fix the ports appropriately with PTHREAD_CFLAGS and PTHREAD_LDFLAGS > (2) Have services like process debugging, profiling available and known > fully functional (or close). This stuff is good to have, but should the lack of it prevent moving libkse -> libpthread? It sounds like a lot of work. > us are running KSE as our libc_r via libmap.conf on all our machines, and > have been for many months, and it appears to hold up quite well :-). > Resolving how best to declare threading support in binaries will also > facilitate shipping the JDK linked against KSE. I also use libkse via libmap.conf, and am happy with it. I also agree that having a KSE-friendly version of the JDK will be very important. Are there any other ports that we should focus our efforts on in getting KSE to work with? httpd, mysql, ACE,....? Thanks. -- Craig Rodrigues http://crodrigues.org rodrigc@crodrigues.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040108012007.GA38122>