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.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message