Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:02:54 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: Paul Allen <nospam@ugcs.caltech.edu>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Subject: Re: Comments on the KSE option Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0610291901110.20129@sea.ntplx.net> In-Reply-To: <4544EAE6.2030406@samsco.org> References: <45425D92.8060205@elischer.org> <200610281132.21466.davidxu@freebsd.org> <20061028105454.S69980@fledge.watson.org> <20061028194125.GL30707@riyal.ugcs.caltech.edu> <20061028204357.A83519@fledge.watson.org> <200610290344.k9T3itAw054920@apollo.backplane.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0610290048530.15683@sea.ntplx.net> <4544380E.4010604@samsco.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0610290845150.17696@sea.ntplx.net> <4544EAE6.2030406@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006, Scott Long wrote: > Btw, why is PTHREADS_INVARIANTS still enabled on -STABLE branches? We > don't have kernel INVARIANTS enabled there, so I don't understand why > libpthread needs to be different. Because it doesn't hurt anything. I should just remove it and always have it enabled so noone would complaint. I think it also aids in telling us what happened when people mistakenly mix different threading libraries (don't 'portupgrade -af'). -- DE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0610291901110.20129>