Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:34:13 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Quo vadis, -CURRENT? (recent changes to cc & compatibility) Message-ID: <20030910193413.GC77756@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20030910165645.GA2839@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <3F5F2774.9010408@gmx.net> <20030910144620.GA2438@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <3F5F420B.5030202@gmx.net> <20030910165645.GA2839@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 09:56:45AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > >4.9 and 5.0-R are independent branch. By your logic we should wait to > > >4.10 or 4.11 or 4.12 or ... before any substantial change can be made > > >to -CURRENT. > > > > The point is that is isn't wise to commit a change like the -pthread > > deprecation that breaks many ports just before a ports-freeze. > > Which threads library should -pthread link to your app (libc_r, > libkse, or libthr) on a 5.x system? It should be a stub that libmap then maps to the threading lib you wanted. Or variations on this. If you have a strong interest in this there is a long discussion about this going on.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030910193413.GC77756>