Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 12:57:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> To: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fixing -pthreads (Re: ports and -current) Message-ID: <20030921125422.I22563@znfgre.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <20030921083800.GB31793@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309210238590.26520-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> <20030921083800.GB31793@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, John Birrell wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 01:25:09AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> > I am a little confused about one thing though. What is going to
> > happen to third party apps that use -pthread that aren't compiled
> > through the ports?
>
> They need to replace -pthread with their thread library of choice
> (e.g. -lc_r or -lpthread).
Errrr... I'm not sure this is an optimal solution. There is an awful
lot of software out there which expects -pthread to "just work."
Wouldn't it make more sense to default it to one thing or the other,
then make it configurable (isn't this what libmap.conf is supposed to
help with)?
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030921125422.I22563>