From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 26 12:31:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3CD737B404 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:31:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4C543F93 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:31:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.201]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2QKUsKu025573; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:30:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2QKUsBm011609; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:30:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h2QKUsbL011608; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:30:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:30:54 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Daniel Eischen Message-ID: <20030326203054.GC11320@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20030326195051.GB11320@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-30.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: arch@freebsd.org cc: kse@elischer.org Subject: Re: Not providing static libraries (libkse/libpthread) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 20:31:28 -0000 On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 03:05:11PM -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > Just because Solaris and IRIX doesn't mean we shouldn't; > I'm just using those as examples. My point really is that if you have good reasons (good reasons for us) to drop the archive threads library then you should go for it. Precedence is a good way to make your case, but what applies in those cases may not apply to us, so what may have been good reasons for them may not be good reasons for us. Thus, you have to know (roughly) why they have dropped the archive library if you want to use them as examples. Just stating that it isn't there may just as well mean that it hasn't been installed (or bought), not that they don't have it. I know HP doesn't have it, but they dropped archive libraries completely. And as far as I know they followed Sun's example (as they so often do). Old archive libraries may still be provided for backward compatibility though... -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net