Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 12:55:41 -0500 From: "Richard Seaman, Jr." <dick@tar.com> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linuxthreads "port" status and a request Message-ID: <19990408125541.H440@tar.com> In-Reply-To: <199904081734.NAA24731@pcnet1.pcnet.com>; from Daniel Eischen on Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 01:34:01PM -0400 References: <199904081734.NAA24731@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 01:34:01PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > So any application that wants to use Linuxthreads must ensure that > <PREFIX>/include is first in the include path so that pthread.h and > pthread_np.h are found there instead of /usr/include? This seems > to make sense to me. Almost. Its got to be <PREFIX>/include/something_unique rather than just <PREFIX>/include, but other than that, yes. The reason it has to be unique is that lots of ports already do -I/usr/local/include, and for those that are threaded and want FreeBSD user threads, they'ed get the wrong headers if the linux pthread.h was in /usr/local/include. > > I haven't looked at Linuxthreads, but is it possible for our pthread.h > and pthread_np.h to be compatible (assuming we add missing capabilities)? I think the differences are very extensive, so apart from one big #ifdef clause that totally bifurcates pthread.h, I'd say no. -- Richard Seaman, Jr. email: dick@tar.com 5182 N. Maple Lane phone: 414-367-5450 Chenequa WI 53058 fax: 414-367-5852 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?19990408125541.H440>