From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jun 12 17:15:38 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id RAA09428
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Jun 1995 17:15:38 -0700
Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id RAA09422
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Jun 1995 17:15:37 -0700
Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1)
	id AA12874; Mon, 12 Jun 95 18:07:32 MDT
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Message-Id: <9506130007.AA12874@cs.weber.edu>
Subject: Re: LWP, anyone?
To: leisner@sdsp.mc.xerox.com (Marty Leisner)
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 95 18:07:31 MDT
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <9506122153.AA02517@gnu.mc.xerox.com> from "Marty Leisner" at Jun 12, 95 02:53:10 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52]
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

[ ... LWP ... ]

] > This is not a pthreads competitor.
] > 
] > This is an API compatability issue for many, many SunOS 4.x (x>1)
] > applications.
] > 
] > 
] Which applications use the sun LWP package?
] 
] I learned it and found it useless since no thread can block in
] a system call...

The ones in the internals classes at Weber, for one.  8-).

There are several commercial products (Sybase?) that use the async I/O
that comes part-and-parcel with the changes (it was added for LWP).

There are several multiuser daemons that use it to (one http server
that you'd have to talk to someone besides me [ie: actually at Weber]
about).

The async I/O is probably the bix win, but since cooperative tasking
and register state save also find some of the components useful, it
might as well go in as the whole ball of wax (considering it's free).


					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.