Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 03:24:42 +0900 From: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Dag-Erling =?ISO-2022-JP?B?U21fX3JncmF2?= <des@des.no>, Norikatsu, Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: libpthread vs libthr. Message-ID: <20061112032442.04c4d246.nork@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0611111224560.6747@sea.ntplx.net> References: <20061110151247.GA64530@zone3000.net> <20061111022044.8191e1c8.nork@FreeBSD.org> <20061111065629.GA82094@xor.obsecurity.org> <20061111235332.89f24170.nork@FreeBSD.org> <86lkmivws6.fsf@dwp.des.no> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0611111224560.6747@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 12:33:37 -0500 (EST) Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> wrote: > world. Then rebuild your ports. After that, all your ports will > reference symbols in FBSD_1_0, and if libthr doesn't provide > sched_yield@FBSD_1_0, it'll find it in libc. By the way, can gdm resolve sched_yield@FBSD_1_0 instead of sched_yield@LIBTHREAD_1.0? I don't think so. Is there a symbol resolving fallback mechanism which I don't know?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061112032442.04c4d246.nork>