From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 2 16:09:07 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 5E69F37B401; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:09:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net (stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.188]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A48D643FBF; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:09:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0436.cvx22-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.199.181] helo=mindspring.com) by stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 190sHk-0001FX-00; Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:08:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3E8B7B16.B27BD31D@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:06:46 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Wemm References: <20030402231346.D83692A8A7@canning.wemm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a43068a134cc57bdd99dd1d19d620b05c5350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c cc: Robert Watson cc: Jeff Roberson cc: csujun@21cn.com cc: current@freebsd.org cc: Alexander Leidinger Subject: Re: FreeBSD threads list suggestion (was libthr and 1:1 threading.) 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: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:09:07 -0000 Peter Wemm wrote: > Terry Lambert wrote: > > > KSE mailing list, starting Monday or so: > > ] We still haven't heard from jeff with regard to the process > > ] signal mask removal. > > We can add new mailing lists really easily now - it takes about 20-30 seconds. > Would it be worth adding a freebsd-threads and/or freebsd-kse type list > where it is a bit higher profile? Probably a threads or even a threads-arch list. I think the KSE people are happy off on the InterJet hosted list that Julian has been running forever, but the introduction of the libthr code has thrown a new element out there. It's not technically under the KSE umbrella. My own big concern is that KSE not be abandoned, just because Linux uses 1:1 and some Solaris engineers thought they could reduce their bug-count by not supporting a more complex (and useful) model. The problem is that libthr wasn't supposed to compete with KSE, but there are people posting as if it does, and the only shared forum is where the postings were made. Most of these people are historical Linux threading model advocates who are tired of waiting for KSE, or "if it doesn't work in 30 days, rip it out" types. Some things take time. In any case, it's definitely worth moving this type of discussion off -current, IMO. Maybe even banning it (and the questions that started it) on -current altogether. -- Historical footnote -- I think we would have had the same problem in 1993/4, if we had enough people, when 386BSD/FreeBSD rejected the SVR3 fixed mapping shared libary model, in favor of a BSD shared libary/PIC model. It took a relatively long time to get the PIC model, and the SVR3 implementation was done for a long time (PIC required compiler work by Jeffrey Hsu to be practical, which took until almost June 1994). -- Terry