Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:08:10 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> Cc: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, current@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: libc/libc_r changes require rebuild of threaded apps Message-ID: <3A6F281A.858B78AC@FreeBSD.org> References: <20010124084058.S26076@fw.wintelcom.net> <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010124123019.6201A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> <20010124123147.A2215@dan.emsphone.com> <3A6F20EE.15B78584@FreeBSD.org> <20010124130233.B2215@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Jan 24), Maxim Sobolev said: > > Dan Nelson wrote: > > > I thought the old way was just -pthread, and it would handle > > > everything. I did a quick scan of the devel/ and net/ branches of our > > > ports tree, and of 43 thread-using ports, 36 of the ports simply add > > > -pthread. Only 7 also add -D_THREAD_SAFE. > > > > It's not a very accurate estimate, as the magic can be in the > > distfile itself, i.e. properly written configure script or makefile > > may know that FreeBSD need a -pthread and -D_THREAD_SAFE. > > Right; I only scanned for ports that had been patched to support our > pthreads. I checked a couple of other ports that I know have native > threads support (gnut, db3, mysql) and only db3 adds -D_THREAD_SAFE. > > The pthread(3) manpage doesn't mention -D_THREAD_SAFE at all. Would it > be a good idea to edit the specs file in -STABLE to add that define > when the user compiles with -pthread? No, I think it would violate POLA. AFAIK, the most that you can to do is to mention it somehow in pthread manpage. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A6F281A.858B78AC>