Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:20:35 +0000 From: John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 101512 for review Message-ID: <20060714192035.GA10850@what-creek.com> In-Reply-To: <200607140959.56995.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200607140506.k6E56odA034076@repoman.freebsd.org> <200607140959.56995.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:59:56AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday 14 July 2006 01:06, John Birrell wrote: > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=101512 > > > > Change 101512 by jb@jb_freebsd2 on 2006/07/14 05:06:23 > > > > Use the proper way to tell gcc to link threaded. > > > > Note that there isn't a _single_ place in the FreeBSD source tree > > where threaded programs are built properly. No wonder that the > > ports people often get it wrong too! > > That's because the proper way currently defined in is "-lpthread" rather > than "-pthread" :-P Not according to the gcc developers. This was an issue discussed back when deischen proposed to get rid of the -pthread option. It was strongly opposed bu the gcc people because they wanted -pthread to be used so that gcc would just DTRT. There have been so many instances of ople attempting to mix the thread libraries over the years, causing strange link senarios -- none of which would have happeneded if -pthread had been used. -- John Birrell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060714192035.GA10850>