From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Apr 19 23: 5:24 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from november.jaded.net (november.jaded.net [209.90.128.250])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FF1114C0A
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 23:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dan@november.jaded.net)
Received: (from dan@localhost)
	by november.jaded.net (8.9.3/8.9.3+trinsec_nospam) id CAA52011;
	Tue, 20 Apr 1999 02:06:56 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 02:06:55 -0400
From: Dan Moschuk <dan@trinsec.com>
To: "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu>
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: -lpthread
Message-ID: <19990420020654.A51944@trinsec.com>
References: <199904200330.XAA08749@cs.rpi.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i
In-Reply-To: <199904200330.XAA08749@cs.rpi.edu>; from David E. Cross on Mon, Apr 19, 1999 at 11:30:48PM -0400
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


| Can we have it so that '-lpthread' accomplishes the same as '-lc_r' in
| terms of allowing threaded programs to link/run correctly?  As was pointed
| out to me recently '-lc_r' for pthread support is a bit non-standard.

What's wrong with the -pthread option to gcc? (egcs as well?)

-Dan


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