Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Feb 1998 06:19:45 +1100 (EST)
From:      John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au>
To:        k.keithley@opengroup.org (Kaleb S. KEITHLEY)
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: _POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS and *_r functions
Message-ID:  <199802271919.GAA17326@cimlogic.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <34F6EC08.F6@opengroup.org> from "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" at "Feb 27, 98 11:38:32 am"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> That means that if you don't have the Thread Safe Functions, then you
> can't define _POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS. (And therefore you can't
> define _POSIX_THREADS, which is sort of the reverse of the claim that if
> you define _POSIX_THREADS then you must define
> _POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS.)

Hmm, I've always read the "otherwise" case as making these functions
optional, but now you've made me reread the clauses, I think I
agree that _POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS means these functions should
be there. I think they should be in libc, not just libc_r.

-- 
John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@netbsd.org; jb@freebsd.org
CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802271919.GAA17326>