Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 00:43:12 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: jb@cimlogic.com.au (John Birrell) Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au, jb@cimlogic.com.au, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu, tlambert@primenet.com Subject: Re: Thread calls Message-ID: <199809030043.RAA00700@usr07.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199809020832.SAA28105@cimlogic.com.au> from "John Birrell" at Sep 2, 98 06:32:40 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > It sounds like it has turned into a defacto standard for determining > > the thread version on the system though :( > > It's a Terry standard. Doh! So long as all of the differences or none of the differences between Draft 4 and Draft 10 are addressed, atomically, I would agree. What's the status of the "attr" argument to pthread_create in -current? Is it Draft 4, or is it Standard? Etc.? I think if something is documented as existing in Standard, but not in Draft 4, then it can be used as a test to determine which one prevails on a given platform. Using this test, along with the select and several other changes, resulted in my patches making LDAP run on 7 platforms where before it limped in an infinite CPU buzz-loop. IRIX, for example, shipped with a Draft 4 compliant implementation, and works via this test. So it's not just me... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. 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?199809030043.RAA00700>