Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:06:36 +0900 From: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: ports/devel/icu: PTHREAD_LIBS clean Message-ID: <20061129230636.aef46d92.nork@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200611271114.42304@aldan> References: <20061127222709.aa35ab22.nork@FreeBSD.org> <200611271032.18366@aldan> <20061128005936.5ae4b851.nork@FreeBSD.org> <200611271114.42304@aldan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:14:41 -0500 Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com> wrote: > = I don't think trying to use multiple threads at the same time. > = But if applications use libthr, libraries must use libthr, too. > You are right about the dangers of mixing different thread implementations, > but library may also be not using threads _at all_. -lm, for example, is > happily used by many threaded programs without itself being thread-aware. I understand your ideal, think so too. However, in fact, it is unrealistic environment:-(. > (If anything, a library, even a thread-aware one, should, arguably, not be > explicitly linking with any thread implementation -- this way, it will use, > whatever implementation the application is using. But that's a different > topic...) Yeah! :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061129230636.aef46d92.nork>