Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 Apr 1999 13:34:01 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
To:        dick@tar.com, obrien@NUXI.com
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Linuxthreads "port" status and a request
Message-ID:  <199904081734.NAA24731@pcnet1.pcnet.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > 2) installing a new top level pthread.h that looks like:
> > > 
> > > #if defined(LINUXTHREADS) || defined(LINUXTHREAD)
> > > #include </usr/local/include/pthread/linuxthreads/pthread.h>
> > 
> > What if PREFIX was set to something other than "/usr/local" when the
> > person compiled the port?
>
> Then the user would have to add an additional compile option like:
>
> -I/nonstandard_prefix/include/pthread/linuxthreads
>
> in order for the app to find the right files.  In fact, the main
> alternative to what I have proposed is simply to make them
> do this anyway using whatever PREFIX they chose, and not mess with
> the FreeBSD src tree.

So any application that wants to use Linuxthreads must ensure that
<PREFIX>/include is first in the include path so that pthread.h and
pthread_np.h are found there instead of /usr/include?  This seems
to make sense to me.

I haven't looked at Linuxthreads, but is it possible for our pthread.h
and pthread_np.h to be compatible (assuming we add missing capabilities)?

Dan Eischen
eischen@vigrid.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904081734.NAA24731>