Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:12:29 +0200
From:      Jeremy Lea <reg@shale.csir.co.za>
To:        "Richard Seaman, Jr." <dick@tar.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Using LinuxThreads
Message-ID:  <19990121181228.A98581@shale.csir.co.za>
In-Reply-To: <19990119091151.F600@tar.com>; from Richard Seaman, Jr. on Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 09:11:51AM -0600
References:  <19990118182717.A15566@top.worldcontrol.com> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901182203500.11971-100000@janus.syracuse.net> <19990119024539.A88383@top.worldcontrol.com> <19990119140613.B826@shale.csir.co.za> <19990119091151.F600@tar.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 09:11:51AM -0600, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> Actually, the new version, in FreeBSD "ports" form, doesn't require 
> -DLINUXTHREADS anymore, but it does require -I/usr/local/include to
> pick up the right header, since it installs a pthread.h into 
> /usr/local/include.  This conflicts with the pthread.h in /usr/include.

This is nagging at me.  Having two headers of the same name, but importantly
different content is asking for touble.  There needs to be a way to ensure
that only one or the other is picked up.  The best way I can think of is to
only include the contents of the user thread pthread.h if _THREAD_SAFE is
defined (to force people to use the right defines...) and the contents of
kernel thread pthread.h if _REENTRANT (and not _THREAD_SAFE) is defined. 
This has the added bonus of meaning that most linux apps wont have to be
patched.

To many applications have configure scripts which might find
/usr/local/lib/libpthread, but not /usr/local/include/pthread.h, or find
/usr/lib/libc_r and find /usr/local/include/pthread.h.

<Thinking> Can gcc be made to define _THREAD_SAFE automatically if -pthread
is given? And _REENTRANT if -kthread is given?

What are the plans for the import of the LinuxThreads stuff into the src
tree?  Or is it going to remain a port, and the source tree position be
reserved for a future kernel threads implementation?  My mind says it is to
closely tied to the OS to be a port.

And when are COMPAT_LINUX_THREADS and VM_STACK going away?

Regards,
 -Jeremy

-- 
  |   "In this world of temptation, I will stand for what is right.
--+--  With a heart of salvation, I will hold up the light.
  |    If I live or if I die, if I laugh or if I cry,
  |    in this world of temptation, I will stand." -Pam Thum

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990121181228.A98581>