On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 05:06:05PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Chad David wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:19:43AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
Perhaps because maintaining them in the FreeBSD repo might be the wrong
place. To answer your other questiion -- because a change to fix one
[ ... Objective C ... ]
Chad David wrote:
And I thought this thread was dead :).
It just showed up in the inbox last night; it must have been stuck
in your mail server. Sorry about that.
I don't really feel a need to convince. If people are too busy (or
just do not care) to maintain ObjC
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:47:02PM -0600, Loren James Rittle wrote:
Use thr-objc not thr-posix. thr-objc maps to the gcc generic thread
abstration layer and is better supported these days. It will also
correctly disable overhead related to threading when a program is
single-threaded using
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Chad David[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Use thr-objc not thr-posix. thr-objc maps to the gcc generic thread
abstration layer and is better supported these days. It will also
correctly disable overhead related to threading when a program is
single-threaded using
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:52:56PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
That said, if you want to make it work for you, I'm behind you
100%: I think any changes you want to make are OK; they can
always be backed out, if anyone starts complaining about them
breaking things, so I think it's kind of silly
David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:52:56PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
That said, if you want to make it work for you, I'm behind you
100%: I think any changes you want to make are OK; they can
always be backed out, if anyone starts complaining about them
breaking things, so
Hi,
I don't think many people in the FreeBSD community use
Objective-C, hence the apparent lack of a maintainer.
The proper way to submit patches to the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailing list at the FSF GCC project
is to follow the procedures documented at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
If you are
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:17:07AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:02:16PM -0700, Chad David wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:11:56PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:09:41PM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Does anybody know if there is a good
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:19:43AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:52:56PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
That said, if you want to make it work for you, I'm behind you
100%: I think any changes you want to make are OK; they can
always be backed out, if anyone starts
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:23:00AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:52:56PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
That said, if you want to make it work for you, I'm behind you
100%: I think any changes you want to make are OK; they can
always be backed
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:23:53AM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Which brings us back to my original question... why are ObjC threads
disabled? I don't much care about my other patches, I just want
to know who the 10 others are who will break if we enable threads,
and how to fix that breakage.
* De: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-30 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Objective-C threads ]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:23:53AM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Which brings us back to my original question... why are ObjC threads
disabled? I don't much care about my other patches, I
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:16:26AM -0700, Chad David wrote:
No there is no reason, and yes the changes are generic. I don't really
expect there to be many (if any) changes to libobjc that are not generic,
so if gcc-patches is the place to go, that is where I'll go.
It is.
In your
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:09:16AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:23:53AM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Which brings us back to my original question... why are ObjC threads
disabled? I don't much care about my other patches, I just want
to know who the 10 others are
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:22:21AM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-30 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Objective-C threads ]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:23:53AM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Which brings us back to my original question... why are ObjC
* De: Chad David [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-30 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Objective-C threads ]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:22:21AM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-30 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Objective-C threads ]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002
Chad David wrote:
That said, if you want to make it work for you, I'm behind you
100%: I think any changes you want to make are OK; they can
always be backed out, if anyone starts complaining about them
breaking things, so I think it's kind of silly for you to ask
for permission to
Chad David wrote:
In your experience, how long is the delay between gcc-patches accepting
something and FreeBSD picking it up, ie. is it worth the effort?
Jeremey Allison (of SAMBA) and I made patches to ACAP to get it
to compile under G++, and that required patches to G++ 2.9.3 to
support per
Use thr-objc not thr-posix. thr-objc maps to the gcc generic thread
abstration layer and is better supported these days. It will also
correctly disable overhead related to threading when a program is
single-threaded using weak symbols. thr-posix doesn't do that...
Regards,
Loren
To
* De: Loren James Rittle [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-30 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Objective-C threads ]
Use thr-objc not thr-posix. thr-objc maps to the gcc generic thread
abstration layer and is better supported these days. It will also
correctly disable overhead related to threading
Does anybody know if there is a good reason why libobjc is built with
thr-single.c? As well, who is the current maintainer of Objective-C?
--
Chad David[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.FreeBSD.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ISSci Inc.Calgary, Alberta Canada
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
Chad David wrote:
Does anybody know if there is a good reason why libobjc is built with
thr-single.c?
Historical threads problems.
As well, who is the current maintainer of Objective-C?
Chad David?
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:09:41PM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Does anybody know if there is a good reason why libobjc is built with
thr-single.c? As well, who is the current maintainer of Objective-C?
Few of us have ObjC clue. Do you have a patch that makes things better
that you can explain to
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:11:56PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:09:41PM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Does anybody know if there is a good reason why libobjc is built with
thr-single.c? As well, who is the current maintainer of Objective-C?
Few of us have ObjC clue.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:04:21PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Chad David wrote:
Does anybody know if there is a good reason why libobjc is built with
thr-single.c?
Historical threads problems.
A few are obvious from simply reading the code. Do you have any
knowledge of specific
* De: Chad David [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-29 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Objective-C threads ]
As well, who is the current maintainer of Objective-C?
Chad David?
By default, since there seem to be no other users?
I'm willing to help out with testing Objective-C stuff, and any
David O'Brien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 07:09:41PM -0700, Chad David wrote:
Does anybody know if there is a good reason why libobjc is built with
thr-single.c? As well, who is the current maintainer of Objective-C?
Few of us have ObjC clue. Do you have a patch that makes things
27 matches
Mail list logo
