Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 01:49:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: Michael Edenfield <kutulu@kutulu.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Initial list of ports that fail due to -pthread Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309240137330.28336-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20030924053413.GA28722@wombat.localnet>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Michael Edenfield wrote: > * Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> [030923 22:21]: > > > Here is a partial list of the ports that need to be taught to respect > > PTHREAD_LIBS and PTHREAD_CFLAGS, from the latest 5.x package build (I > > just grepped for the "-pthread is deprecated" error message). None of > > One very important group of ports that should get looked at when this > gets worked out is KDE. Apparently, Qt uses a different means of > determining wether to use threading, than the ports that depend on it. > The qt-using ports appear to check for -lpthread, then c++ -pthread, and > if neither of those checks pass, disable threading: > > checking for pthread_create in -lpthread... no > checking whether c++ supports -pthread... no When libkse gets installed as libpthread, the above check will be different. But, if we want the thread library to be selectable by PTHREAD_LIBS, this isn't what you'd want if PTHREAD_LIBS != -lpthread. This was going to be the next hurdle to jump over. If FreeBSD wants to take the simple approach and only support one thread library in ports (-pthread == -lpthread) and not make it selectable via PTHREAD_LIBS, then its not a problem. It would be nice to be able to support all our thread libraries, but I grow weary. -- Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10309240137330.28336-100000>