From owner-freebsd-current Fri Nov 14 20:02:31 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA27510 for current-outgoing; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 20:02:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.117]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27504 for ; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 20:02:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chuckr@glue.umd.edu) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by picnic.mat.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA06613; Fri, 14 Nov 1997 21:58:29 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: picnic.mat.net: chuckr owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 21:58:28 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@picnic.mat.net To: Amancio Hasty cc: FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: using pthreads In-Reply-To: <199711150321.TAA03467@rah.star-gate.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 14 Nov 1997, Amancio Hasty wrote: > > > cc -o foo foo.c -lc_r > Amancio, does that give precedence to functions implemented in both the libc and libc_r, to the thread-safe versions? That's what I'm worried about. The pthread_* versions only exist in the libc_r, so those aren't my worries, it's the rest of the show I'm not sure about. > > Cheers, > Amancio > > > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@glue.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------