Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 18:16:55 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Ian Hungerford <ianh@saturn-tech.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, johnbi@rdd.neca.nec.com.au Subject: Re: Thread safe libc Message-ID: <341C8C87.2781E494@whistle.com> References: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970914175132.20520A-100000@hobbes.saturn-tech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
discuss this with john birrel. he's hiding at the moment at: johnbi@rdd.neca.nec.com.au he did most of what's been done so far.. he's likely to say "be my guest" as far as doing more work on this goes, as he's very busy. julian Ian Hungerford wrote: > > In my recent browsings through the -stable and -current trees, I have > found (to my immense dismay) that libc is not really thread safe at all. > It appears at first glance that stdio & malloc are pretty much covered, > but string & net appear to be untouched. I'm willing to do the work here > (or assist if somebody's already at it). So if there is a somebody, speak > up. :) > > Also, I run a -stable system, and I can't see my self using -current until > I get another box - what are the chances of any patches to -stable libc > sliding in a smooth and orderly way into -current? I'll upgrade if I must > (threads are somewhat necessary for my current project), but I'd much > rather stick with -stable for now. > > --- > Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?341C8C87.2781E494>