On Wednesday 18 May 2005 02:01, Grant wrote:
> > > How do you tell an app to use linuxthreads instead? What is the point
> > > of +nptlonly? A more compact installation?
> >
> > A trick to make an app use linuxthreads is set
> > LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.19
> > in the env your app will run in.
>
> Why
> > How do you tell an app to use linuxthreads instead? What is the point
> > of +nptlonly? A more compact installation?
>
> A trick to make an app use linuxthreads is set
> LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.19
> in the env your app will run in.
Why don't apps set that on their own if they require it?
- Gr
Grant wrote:
> How do you tell an app to use linuxthreads instead? What is the point
> of +nptlonly? A more compact installation?
A trick to make an app use linuxthreads is set
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.19
in the env your app will run in.
--
On Mon, 16 May 2005 17:10:32 -0700
Mark Knecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/16/05, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > If I use -nptlonly instead of +, do I still risk incompatibilities?
> > >
> > > with ntplonly you WILL have problems. With 'nptl', you can say the apps
> > > which
> >
Grant wrote:
>>>If I use -nptlonly instead of +, do I still risk incompatibilities?
>>>
>>>
>>with ntplonly you WILL have problems. With 'nptl', you can say the apps which
>>implementation to use. Great for broken/old apps with problems. BUT if you
>>use ntplonly you can NOT go back, and if
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 01:37, Grant wrote:
> > > If I use -nptlonly instead of +, do I still risk incompatibilities?
> >
> > with ntplonly you WILL have problems. With 'nptl', you can say the apps
> > which implementation to use. Great for broken/old apps with problems. BUT
> > if you use ntplonly
On 5/16/05, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If I use -nptlonly instead of +, do I still risk incompatibilities?
> >
> > with ntplonly you WILL have problems. With 'nptl', you can say the apps
> > which
> > implementation to use. Great for broken/old apps with problems. BUT if you
> > use nt
> > If I use -nptlonly instead of +, do I still risk incompatibilities?
>
> with ntplonly you WILL have problems. With 'nptl', you can say the apps which
> implementation to use. Great for broken/old apps with problems. BUT if you
> use ntplonly you can NOT go back, and if an app has a problem wit
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 01:04, Grant wrote:
>
> If I use -nptlonly instead of +, do I still risk incompatibilities?
with ntplonly you WILL have problems. With 'nptl', you can say the apps which
implementation to use. Great for broken/old apps with problems. BUT if you
use ntplonly you can NOT go
> > What do you mean by rebuilding the machine? Do packages need to be
> > recompiled under the new glibc to take advantage of NPTL?
>
> no, just no.
>
> There is almost never the need to recompile your system, and this is one of
> the points, where recompiling is pointless. Spend your time doin
A. Khattri wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2005, kashani wrote:
completing them any faster than the old server. However load remains a
steady 0.10-0.20 whether there are 300 threads or 500. This appears to
be the main benefit of the new threading. Better scalabilty and more
efficient use of resources in a h
On Monday 16 May 2005 22:43, Grant wrote:
>
> What do you mean by rebuilding the machine? Do packages need to be
> recompiled under the new glibc to take advantage of NPTL?
no, just no.
There is almost never the need to recompile your system, and this is one of
the points, where recompiling is
Tried it out a few months ago and didn't notice much of a difference
speedwise. I found pretty quickly that it broke transcode (dunno if
this is still the case) so I reverted to linuxthreads. That caused me
quite a bit of headache as I had already rebuilt half the system with
nptl and had to re-r
On Mon, 16 May 2005, kashani wrote:
> completing them any faster than the old server. However load remains a
> steady 0.10-0.20 whether there are 300 threads or 500. This appears to
> be the main benefit of the new threading. Better scalabilty and more
> efficient use of resources in a highly thre
Grant wrote:
Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
nptlonly?
I recently updated a Mysql box from Mysql 3.2.x, 2.4 kernel, dual PI
On 5/16/05, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 5/16/05, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
> > > what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
> > > well with NPTL? What about the practical differ
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 01:25:37PM -0700, Grant wrote:
> Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
> what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
> well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
> nptlonly?
I switched a whil
Grant wrote:
> Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
> what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
> well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
> nptlonly?
>
> - Grant
>
Java apps benefit a lot from ntpl.
Loki's
> On 5/16/05, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
> > what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
> > well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
> > nptlonly?
> >
> > - Grant
>
Grant wrote:
>Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
>what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
>well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
>nptlonly?
>
>
I can't say I see a speed difference, but then again, I
On 5/16/05, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
> what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
> well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
> nptlonly?
>
> - Grant
I switched. (Q
Has anyone switched to NPTL and noticed a speed difference? If so,
what seems faster? Has anyone run across any packages that don't work
well with NPTL? What about the practical difference between + and -
nptlonly?
- Grant
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
22 matches
Mail list logo
