From owner-freebsd-java Wed Mar 7 16:44:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from pluto.senet.com.au (pluto.senet.com.au [203.56.239.150]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6924E37B719 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2001 16:44:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from glewis@misty.eyesbeyond.com) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (c27-fr-p2.senet.com.au [172.16.27.3]) by pluto.senet.com.au (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f280ibT24320; Thu, 8 Mar 2001 11:14:37 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from glewis@misty.eyesbeyond.com) Received: (from glewis@localhost) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f280iGi24327; Thu, 8 Mar 2001 11:14:16 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from glewis) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 11:14:16 +1030 From: Greg Lewis To: Bill Huey Cc: Greg Lewis , "Daniel M. Eischen" , java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Java and libc/libpthread Message-ID: <20010308111416.A24274@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <3AA52622.CA33EBE2@vigrid.com> <20010308015558.B43890@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <20010307161130.A4910@gnuppy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010307161130.A4910@gnuppy>; from billh@gnuppy.monkey.org on Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 04:11:30PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 04:11:30PM -0800, Bill Huey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 01:55:58AM +1030, Greg Lewis wrote: > > 3. As I've been tinkering with the the 1.3 code I've so far been > > using the linuxthreads port to try and get native threads running > > as that means our code stays very very similar to the code for > > native threads under Linux. I haven't succeeded with this yet, > > but I don't believe thats because it can't work (its just lack of > > time to debug things so far). > > What ? Screw that. The LinuxThreads signal interaction with SIGCHLD, > etc... within an ill concieved thread/signal semantics specification > (aka Unix) is going to to be murder to deal with. Well, off the top, I'll disclaim anything approaching thorough knowledge of the various thread implementations being discussed :). In terms of linuxthreads there were a number of reasons I chose that at the time: (a) I wasn't aware of your BSD/OS work. (b) I wanted to use something as close as possible to the implementations that came with the code, since I didn't have a lot of time to rework things. (c) I figured most of the issues would have been dealt with during the Linux port of the JDK. (d) Its (currently) the only mainstream kernel-based thread interface for FreeBSD. None of this means its the best choice now (or even was then :). > I recommend doing it using the normal Solaris/Pthreads code instead. > > I also might be able to get our pthread library to the general FreeBSD > community which might help with your port since we have it pretty well > debugged for our (this) purposes. I haven't seen the FreeBSD pthreads > userspace library so I can't comment on the benefits and draw backs of > doing this ? > > What do you think ? It sounds like the BSD/OS pthreads library is very similar to the current FreeBSD pthreads library, given Daniel's comments in a followup post. So I think the bulk of your work is probably applicable to a FreeBSD port. That probably means there is no need to move the BSD/OS pthreads library over to FreeBSD. Note that the 1.2.2 port also supports NetBSD and has started an attempt on OpenBSD too. We definitely want to keep this support for 1.3, since it increases the volunteer pool (and the bulk of the port is the same). I think that given your work and Daniel's post on a kernel based pthread implementation in the work that its a good idea to switch over to the FreeBSD pthreads interface. I think this will be the best overall fit with everyones goals. All IMO of course :). -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Mobile: 0419 868 494 Information Technology Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message