From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 1 13:32:57 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A10016A400 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 13:32:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.ntplx.net (mail.ntplx.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6310613C4A6 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 13:32:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.ntplx.net (8.14.0/8.14.0/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id l21DWtJA003883; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 08:32:55 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.ntplx.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (mail.ntplx.net [204.213.176.10]); Thu, 01 Mar 2007 08:32:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 08:32:55 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: Martin Blapp In-Reply-To: <20070301121848.L18301@godot.imp.ch> Message-ID: References: <003701c75a03$fb478ac0$d801a8c0@dimuthu> <200702270305.l1R35MX2067221@lava.sentex.ca> <20070227035603.GA49430@tmn.ru> <20070227183553.B18301@godot.imp.ch> <867iu2gtny.fsf@sparrow.local> <3aaaa3a0703010217u63e389f2hbe848a8fc42cd9f2@mail.gmail.com> <868xehfdcs.fsf@sparrow.local> <20070301121848.L18301@godot.imp.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Marko Lerota , Chris , Anton Karpov , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Renato Botelho Subject: Re: Clamav-90_2 Lockup with freebsd 6.2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Eischen List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 13:32:57 -0000 On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Martin Blapp wrote: > > Hi, > > Clamd is currently broken with libpthread for some threading-reason. > You definitly need to use libthr (which is still CPU hungry, but > works better). I don't think it is a problem with libpthread. -- DE