From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Aug 13 01:27:20 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA29954 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 01:27:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fgate.flevel.co.uk (root@fgate.flevel.co.uk [194.6.101.2]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA29940 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 01:27:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dev@localhost) by fgate.flevel.co.uk (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA02017; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:28:20 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:28:19 +0100 (BST) From: Developer To: Terry Lambert cc: A JOSEPH KOSHY , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. NT Stability In-Reply-To: <199608121658.JAA25522@phaeton.artisoft.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 12 Aug 1996, Terry Lambert wrote: > > So my question is: how does NT behave when it has to schedule between a > > large number of processes each with its own process context, VM, page tables > > etc? Conversely how does the unix program behave when linked with -lpthreads > > and with `fork()' replaced with `pthread_create()'? This may be a silly question, but where do I get libpthreads from? Regards, Trefor S.