Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 08:00:43 +1000 (EST) From: John Birrell <cimaxp1!jb@werple.net.au> To: haldjas.folklore.ee!narvi@melb.werple.net.au (Narvi) Cc: keltia.freenix.fr!roberto@melb.werple.net.au, FreeBSD.org!freebsd-hackers@melb.werple.net.au Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. NT Stability Message-ID: <199608152200.IAA08384@melb.werple.net.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960815110002.28270B-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> from "Narvi" at Aug 15, 96 11:03:08 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Before -current, you'd have to get pthread by yourself and worry about some > > functions in libc not aware about threads... > > Hmmm... I do not speak for anyone but myself but weren't they eing > developed on a 2.1.0 or -stable box? They work (at least worked) with > stable for me. I normally run libc_r from -current on 2.1.0R (haven't received a 2.1.5R subscription CD from WC). I doubt there were any syscall interface changes from 2.1.0R to 2.2-current that would affect libc. > > Sander > -- John Birrell CIMlogic Pty Ltd jb@cimlogic.com.au 119 Cecil Street Ph +61 3 9690 6900 South Melbourne Vic 3205 Fax +61 3 9690 6650 Australia Mob +61 18 353 137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608152200.IAA08384>