From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 21 16:20:30 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6B416A4B3 for ; Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MAILSERVER.ofw.fi (ns.ofw.fi [194.111.144.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D331843F75 for ; Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:20:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan.naumov@ofw.fi) Received: from [172.16.161.81] by MAILSERVER.ofw.fi (NTMail 7.00.0022/NT1439.00.90501b21) with ESMTP id ftgamaaa for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 02:19:07 +0300 From: Dan Naumov To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1064186444.1055.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 02:20:44 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Fixing -pthreads (Re: ports and -current) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:20:31 -0000 On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 00:42, Daniel Eischen wrote: > We've already been over this before. The problem is not > as bad as you think, and there are other platforms that > don't have -pthread. And those platforms would be? Sincerely, Dan Naumov