From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 24 09:47:56 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9867816A41F; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 09:47:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr (postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A18243D48; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 09:47:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (vol75-8-82-233-239-98.fbx.proxad.net [82.233.239.98]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C61821734C4; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:47:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5BFBA405A; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:48:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:48:19 +0200 From: Jeremie Le Hen To: Warner Losh Message-ID: <20050824094819.GT659@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <430C042E.70009@nbux.com> <20050824.004445.74670884.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050824.004445.74670884.imp@bsdimp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: deischen@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, lists@nbux.com Subject: Re: nagios and freebsd threads issue : help please ... X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 09:47:56 -0000 Hi all > > This is funny, because nagios apparently runs properly on Linux, HPUX, > > Solaris, Irix, AIX and Tru64. To me that seems to indicate that Nagios > > is very portable indeed and that the BSD fellows somehow botched it. I > > might be wrong, but... > > Just because it works doesn't make it standards conforming. > > Maybe there's some simple extension that can be implemented to help > the situation. It seems the main problem of the Nagios developper seems to be they would need to rewrite a big part of their current implementation. I'm not sure however this is mandatory. I wonder if the so-told pthread_atfork() handler wouldn't be a quick solution to address the problem. Sorry if it's dumb. Regards, -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >