From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 20 17:43:29 2003 Return-Path: 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 178C116A4B3 for ; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC5143FE1 for ; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:43:28 -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 h8L0hIgG021762; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 20:43:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 20:43:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com To: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20030920.164621.68039520.imp@bsdimp.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: current@freebsd.org cc: h@schmalzbauer.de Subject: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 00:43:29 -0000 On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <3F6BF02F.9040707@schmalzbauer.de> > Harald Schmalzbauer writes: > : Not only the -pthread removement broke countless ports (some of them are > > Maybe I missed the reason why FreeBSD needs to be unique wrt threading > programs and not have -pthread... Because -pthread allows selection of one specific threadling library, not multiple. It is also unnecessary since the library is specified as a link option, not a compiler option. In the future, -pthread will be a NOOP, but it suits us now to have it cause an error so that ports that don't honor PTHREAD_LIBS can be found and fixed. -- Dan Eischen