Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 20:31:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> Cc: freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Removing -pthread from gcc Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309052027580.11967-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20030906002836.GB25237@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, John Birrell wrote: > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 08:18:08PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > If you link an application, then it will. But if you are linking > > a library (OpenGL, libgthread, etc), I don't think you will get > > the error. > > Why do you need an error when you build the library? Presumably ports > people actually run the libraries that they build with an application > to test them. If the thread functions don't resolve, you'll get a > runtime error stating which library contained an unresolved reference. > I think these things have a way of working themselves out without having > to be too clever. 8-) Yes, it's just easier if the port to which the library belongs breaks, not the port to which the application belongs. Also, some ports build with both -pthread and -lc_r, so NOOPing -pthread wouldn't break those ports. But that's probably another issue altogether :( -- Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10309052027580.11967-100000>