From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jun 2 12:08:04 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA04614 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uni-kl.de (stepsun.uni-kl.de [131.246.136.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA04582 for ; Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alma.student.uni-kl.de by stepsun.uni-kl.de id aa09379; 2 Jun 96 21:07 MET DST Received: from mater.student.uni-kl.de by alma.student.uni-kl.de with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0uQIUl-0001d0C; Sun, 2 Jun 96 21:07 CETDST Received: by mater.student.uni-kl.de (Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0uQIUl-0001e8C; Sun, 2 Jun 96 21:07 CETDST Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 21:07:21 +0200 (CETDST) From: Martin Heller To: "Ron G. Minnich" cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: coda questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 31 May 1996, Ron G. Minnich wrote: > what degree of threading does it have? > thread per remote computer > enough threads to support demand > thread per exported object > and again, are tehse user-level threads (seems so). > Reason for asking: depending on how much threading, rfork() may do the job. It seems that they're CMU LWP's and if I've got it right they've done some changes to the normal CMU-Mach kernel . They also used their LWP thingies so it won't compile on my FreeBSD hosted MACH4 with Lites1.u3 (missing headers (LWP.h)) . There are also some strange things in their sources (#ifdef __LINUX__) which are probably a hint that it could/was? ported to LINUX. I think you should ask Darren Davis from Novell about the thread problems and which ones are needed or rfork() would do it because he was struck with the threads problem as well and he mailed that NOVELL is somehow interested in Coda . I have only taken a short look at the sources .