From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 21 14:42:49 2003
Return-Path: <owner-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 C023016A4BF; Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8D48044003; Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.10/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h8LLgagG023413;
	Sun, 21 Sep 2003 17:42:36 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 17:42:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com
To: Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030921125422.I22563@znfgre.qbhto.arg>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309211739450.22905-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Fixing -pthreads (Re: ports and -current)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: deischen@freebsd.org
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:42:49 -0000

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doug Barton wrote:

> 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)?

We've already been over this before.  The problem is not
as bad as you think, and there are other platforms that
don't have -pthread.

-- 
Dan Eischen