From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Dec 26 21:59:51 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA06082
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 26 Dec 1997 21:59:51 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current)
Received: (from hsu@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA06074
          for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Fri, 26 Dec 1997 21:59:40 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from hsu)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 21:59:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeffrey Hsu <hsu>
Message-Id: <199712270559.VAA06074@hub.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kernel threads api?
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

  > Not really, plus the 'thread' support in Java isn't as good as the
  > built-in green-thread support.

That will change with the next version of the JDK.  Green threads are
being phased out in favor of native threads.  This is necessary to support
the part of the JNI spec which allows C programs to call Java routines.
C programs linked with the system libc don't mix well with the libc
wrapper routines in Green threads.  Sun is presuming that the standard
libc is re-entrant so it can be used for both C and Java.  This is the
case on Solaris, but not FreeBSD.  Life could be simpler if we just
made libc re-entrant and not distinguish libc from libc_r or libpthread.