Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:47:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Initial list of ports that fail due to -pthread Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309232244110.246-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20030924024354.GA44314@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, John Birrell wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 07:33:43PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > Won't these ports still need to be fixed to look at
> > PTHREAD_{LIBS,CFLAGS} though, since the correct values for 4.x and 5.x
> > will still be different?
>
> Not if -pthread remains. Internally gcc would link to a different
> library, but most ports won't see that.
The problem will be with ports that somehow get -lc_r
without going through PTHREAD_LIBS. And for those that
use both -lc_r and PTHREAD_LIBS, they'll build but won't
run correctly.
BTW, I just fixed zebedee (started at bottom of list).
--
Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10309232244110.246-100000>