Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 22:45:20 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ideas from netbsd Message-ID: <199511080545.WAA27987@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199511080404.VAA19043@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199511080134.MAA06137@werple.net.au> <199511080404.VAA19043@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert writes: > > > The NetBSD "thread environment" consists of both CAP's pthreads code > > > AND a thread safe libc, etc.. > > > > My understanding of the way things are: > > > > NetBSD "thread environment" = CAP's pthreads code including CAP's thread safe > > libc. > > > > FreeBSD "thread environment" = CAP's pthreads code including CAP's thread safe > > libc. > > Your understanding is incorrect according to Julian's post under this > same subject. Huh? Are you reading the same email I'm reading? Julian writes: > there are thread-safe libc mods being worked up at the moment for > FreeBSD The first rounds will be trickling in soon for commit > > they will initially be #ifdef _THREAD_SAFE_ guarded, and used to make > a libc_r, but they willprobably be merged whe they are proven. And, in an earlier post by Chris that was followed up by many folks he explained that he'd like his thread safe fixes to be merged into the standard library vs. being separate. The same changes are going into FreeBSD as you speak about in NetBSD. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511080545.WAA27987>