The windows open IB has decided on using a BSD only license. The common implementation of pthreads as far as I know is LGPL, which means that it can not be used in open IB.
The only two ways that I see around this are 1) Change the license of open IB windows which might be a complicated thing. 2) Find an implementation of pthreads that is BSD. Thanks Tzachi > -----Original Message----- > From: Sasha Khapyorsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 7:46 PM > To: Tzachi Dar; Yossi Leybovich > Cc: Yevgeny Kliteynik; OPENIB; Michael S. Tsirkin; Hal Rosenstock > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] > opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]] > > On 11:24 Sun 21 Jan , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: > > Tzachi, Yossi, please join the thread. > > What do you think about distributing a copy of the pthread DLL with > > opensm? > > Any news here? Thanks. > > Sasha > > > > > -- Yevgeny. > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] opensm: sigusr1: > > syslog() fixes] > > Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 00:20:32 +0200 > > From: Sasha Khapyorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Michael S. Tsirkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > CC: Yevgeny Kliteynik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > OPENIB <openib-general@openib.org> > > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > On 23:50 Thu 18 Jan , Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > Quoting Sasha Khapyorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Subject: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] opensm: sigusr1: > > > > syslog() fixes] > > > > > > > > On 07:00 Thu 18 Jan , Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > What about pure opensource - > > > > > > http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/? It is licensed under > > > > > > LGPL, I see on the net many positive reports about > stability and usability. > > > > > > > > > > I used it to do a windows port of linux complib at some point > > > > > and opensm seemed to work fine with it. What it was > lacking at > > > > > that point was support for 64 bit applications, and for some > > > > > reason (which is still unclear to me) there was a > strong desire to run opensm in 64 bit mode. > > > > > Seems to have been fixed now, BTW. > > > > > > > > So this seems to be good option for OpenSM on Windows. Right? > > > > > > No idea. Distributing a copy of the pthread DLL with > opensm does not > > > look like a problem. But is it worth it? > > > > Sure, it makes windows porting much more transparent and > let us to use > > standard *nix stuff w/out #ifndef WIN32. Other (generic) benefit is > > that posix is more standard and powerful than wrappers like complib. > > > > Sasha > > > _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
