Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:43:07 +0300 From: Valentin Nechayev <netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet.com> Cc: threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Transition plans: libkse->libpthread Message-ID: <20030601074307.GB5594@iv.nn.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10305310127160.26693-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> References: <20030531024932.GP61246@over-yonder.net> <Pine.GSO.4.10.10305310127160.26693-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sat, May 31, 2003 at 01:39:59, eischen (Daniel Eischen) wrote about "Re: Transition plans: libkse->libpthread": DE> No :-) In my mind, the KSE threads library was always supposed DE> to be libpthread (note the 'p' for POSIX). libthr is not able DE> to be fully POSIX compat because the kernel schedules threads DE> and the kernel doesn't conform to POSIX scheduling. I know I'm DE> in the minority, but I think libthr interfaces should "thr_foo()" DE> (similar to Solaris libthread), not "pthread_foo()". But that DE> prevents it from being easily used as a drop-in replacement DE> for libc_r. Can you link one app both with libthr and libpthread? I think no ;) You can add thr_* as alias or for any function specific to libthr, but there are no direct reason to prohibit libthr having pthread interface. DE> We have a mechanism for selecting the threads library that DE> the ports system should be using (PTHREAD_LIBS); it's just DE> not always being obeyed by some ports. How about customizing -pthread or -lpthread flags on GCC level? (Untested idea) -netch-
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030601074307.GB5594>