Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:16:47 +0000 From: John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com> To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> Cc: threads@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Strawman proposal: making libthr default thread implementation? Message-ID: <20060703121647.GA24781@what-creek.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607030803460.5928@sea.ntplx.net> References: <20060703101554.Q26325@fledge.watson.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607030744030.5823@sea.ntplx.net> <20060703120113.GA24614@what-creek.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607030803460.5928@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 08:08:56AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > It's not so much getting libpthread working on the other architectures > (sparc64 is the only Tier 1 (is Sparc64 Tier 1 yet?) that libpthread > doesn't work on). It's being able to support the POSIX standard. > That was the goal years ago when we started the process of designing > a new thread library. I maintain that we have to be able to support > the standard, if we can't then it's a not a good design. Right now I would settle for performance matching Linux before trecking to the end of the earth to comply with POSIX. Most Linux developers probably don't even know what POSIX is. -- John Birrell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060703121647.GA24781>