From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 24 03:15:41 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B3F316A4B3 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2003 03:15:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cimlogic.com.au (cimlog.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.51.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF35A44005 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2003 03:15:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jb@cimlogic.com.au) Received: from freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cimlogic.com.au (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h8OAIUB7045989 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:18:30 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from jb@cimlogic.com.au) Received: (from jb@localhost) by freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h8OAITnY045988 for current@freebsd.org; Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:18:30 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:18:29 +1000 From: John Birrell To: current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20030924101829.GG44314@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> References: <3F70D4EB.1080604@gmx.net> <20030924095153.GE22622@starjuice.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030924095153.GE22622@starjuice.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: Fixing -pthreads (Re: ports and -current) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 10:15:41 -0000 On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:51:53AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > Okay, so what are we supposed to do to ports that are now broken because > -pthread doesn't exist (e.g. devel/pwlib)? -pthread is back in current. It just had a little holiday. It's back, refreshed, eager and willing to do the deed. 8-) > Is there a simple rule we should follow when trying to fix ports, or do > we have to think now? Someone has to think and make a decision. Is simplicity (the -pthread switch) reason enough to support one thread library by default? > At the moment, I'm just patching configure files > to use ${PTHREAD_LIBS} instead of -pthread, and pushing PTHREAD_LIBS > into the ports' CONFIGURE_ENV. I don't think that CONFIGURE_ENV should be modified in each port's makefile to cope with PTHREAD_LIBS. It's supposed to be a ports-wide thing, so it belongs in bsd.port.mk. -- John Birrell