From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 25 20:17:34 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7257116A400 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2006 20:17:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.111.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F1743D55 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2006 20:17:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (acrux [128.131.111.60]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B19137A3; Sun, 25 Jun 2006 22:17:29 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 22:17:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: "[LoN]Kamikaze" In-Reply-To: <449CEB97.5020903@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <449CEB97.5020903@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: latest wine-kthread broken? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 20:17:34 -0000 On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: > The games Starcraft and Diablo 2 which were running fine using > wine-kthread up to this mornings portupgrade, now simply halt (infinite > loop maybe), even CTRL-C doesn't kill them. I have to stop them using > 'killall -9 wine-kthread'. This is the only output: > > Fatal error 'Uninitialized mutex in pthread_mutex_trylock_basic' at line > 496 in file /mnt/vault/src/lib/libpthread/thread/thr_mutex.c (errno = 2) > > I always thought the purpose of kthread is not to use pthread. Thus I > presume that the latest version of wine (wine-0.9.16,1) is broken. This may well be. However, GNU/Linux systems using the pthread variant, there is little hope anyone is ever going to fix the kthread variant. I have included the kthread variant as an added benefit, but all development and bug fixing really should go into the pthread variant. You did not mention whether this works for your applications, but I assume it does not? Gerald