Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 21:33:28 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/gcc/config freebsd-spec.h Message-ID: <3F52BE08.9010408@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <1062386257.42216.21.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10308312240001.15178-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> <3F52B5CE.8040905@freebsd.org> <1062386257.42216.21.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 22:58, Scott Long wrote:
>>
>>This opens up very important questions. How do we smoothly make
>>the transition?
>
>
> What GNOME ports are doing is replacing -lpthread with ${PTHREAD_LIBS}
> wherever we see it. This is done via the gnomehack meta-component.
> There is also a proposal to make a general pthread hack in ports/55683.
>
>
>> What is the appropriate threading library for each
>>platform?
>
>
> Once we decide on this, it should be easy to adjust bsd.port.mk to set
> PTHREAD_LIBS accordingly for each platform.
>
>
>> Should 'libpthread' be a symlink, or should a library be
>>renamed?
>
>
> I don't think you have to do either. It should be easy enough to have
> ${PTHREAD_LIBS} be set to a reasonable value on each platform, plus have
> users override that if they desire.
>
I've heard rumors of some ports that abuse autoconf to check for not
only pthread.h, but also libpthread.so. Is this a concern? What about
packages that one might compile directly (not through the ports tree)?
While this question is probably not politically correct, it is one that
should be addressed. Compiling outside of the ports tree is a common
occurence and we should probably remove as many landmines from it as
possible.
>
>> How do we answer these last two questions in a consistent
>>fashion?
>
>
> I think the main platform developers need to answer the preferred thread
> implementation question, then it needs to be done in bsd.port.mk.
I assume that bsd.port.mk settings can be made on a per-arch basis?
Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F52BE08.9010408>