From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 30 00:03:08 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AECFD16A40F; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 00:03:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.ntplx.net (mail.ntplx.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0325943D5F; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 00:03:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.ntplx.net (8.13.7/8.13.7/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id k9U02s3F007188; Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:02:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:02:54 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: Scott Long In-Reply-To: <4544EAE6.2030406@samsco.org> Message-ID: 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> <4544380E.4010604@samsco.org> <4544EAE6.2030406@samsco.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (mail.ntplx.net [204.213.176.10]); Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:02:55 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.ntplx.net) Cc: Paul Allen , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Robert Watson , David Xu , Julian Elischer Subject: Re: Comments on the KSE option X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Eischen List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 00:03:08 -0000 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