From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Sep 10 13:41:09 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 44A0E16A4BF; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DFD8443FBD; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.8/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h8AKf1A4025290;
	Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:41:01 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:41:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com
To: Michael Edenfield <kutulu@kutulu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030910201600.GA37408@wombat.localnet>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309101632230.23731-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
cc: netchild@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Quo vadis, -CURRENT? (recent changes to cc & compatibility)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: deischen@freebsd.org
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:41:09 -0000

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Michael Edenfield wrote:

> * David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> [030910 15:33]:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 12:41:41PM -0400, Michael Edenfield wrote:
> > > gnome2 depends on gnomemedia2.
> > > gnomemedia2 depends on gstreamer-plugins.
> > > gstreamer-plugins fails because ARTSD_FLAGS in several dozen Makefiles
> > > includes -pthread.
> > 
> > This is being worked on from the compiler stand point.
> 
> Which is the main reason I didn't do a pr on it.  But from reading other
> parts of the thread, it seems that ports should not be using -pthread
> anyway... would it be worthwhile to submit patches to remove -pthread
> (and, for that matter, -lpthread and other variants) in favor of
> ${PTHREAD_LIBS} regardless of wether `cc -pthread` is an error or a
> no-op, or some magical auto-thread-library-selector?

Yes, ${PTHREAD_LIBS} should be used, except perhaps for
ports that are libraries.  Under the proposed scheme,
libraries could be weakly linked to a stub pthread
library (or even pthread stubs in libc I suppose).  Then
when an application (strongly linked to _a_ threads
library) loads/references the library, that library
uses the same threads library that the application is
linked to.

But threaded executables still need to be linked to
some threads library, and that should be selectable
via PTHREAD_LIBS.

-- 
Dan Eischen