From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 8 05:23:51 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 928EF16A4CE for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 05:23:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44EDE43D1F for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 05:23:51 +0000 (GMT) (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 i585NotD027499; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 01:23:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 01:23:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com To: Joe Marcus Clarke In-Reply-To: <1086671609.18374.18.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: Sean McNeil cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: weak implementation of threads has problems - kse fix attached X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 05:23:51 -0000 [ trimmed to threads@ ] On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 00:32, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Sean McNeil wrote: > > > > > > > > Up front, I'd like to make a few apologies: > > > > > > 1) I am sorry for the length of this email. > > > 2) Although some very valid opinions have been expressed, I respectfully > > > have to disagree. This email will hopefully strengthen my position. > > > > Please stop spamming multiple lists. > > > > No, I don't want to litter all our thread libraries with strong references. > > As I've said before, build your shared libraries correctly so they don't > > bring in the threads library. > > In order to do this, I'm a strong proponent of making -pthread the > default PTHREAD_LIBS from 4.X and 5.X. This will do the right thing in > all cases, and reduces diffs among branches. What is keeping this from > happening from a threading standpoint? Nothing from what I can see. -- Dan Eischen