On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > Considering the sad affair w/ pthread on OSX, I would > recommend we stay w/ using sems.
For darwin (and other BSD? or do they still fcntl?), agreed 100%. Linux seems to be in a completely different state of affairs. Unless I'm confusing proc mutexes with thread mutexes again, pthread locks are the one-and-only implementation now with OpenSSL 1.1.0 (the user- replaceable locking callbacks are now no-ops / never invoked.) They don't have timed mutexes I'm aware of, so that additional headache isn't part of their puzzle. But it's a good endorsement for a change on Linux, at least. Given that we didn't elect PROC_PTHREAD mutexes as an alternate _USE_ schema, I don't have a strong opinion about changing this for 1.6.0. It can be overridden by the implementer. It seems we really should change it on trunk and get that tested in the wild by fellow devs, at least.
