On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 09:26:28AM +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 4:09 PM Ben Peart wrote:
> > I agree though I'm still curious if there are still no-threaded
> > platforms taking new versions of git. Perhaps we should do the
> > depreciation warning you suggested elsewhere
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 4:09 PM Ben Peart wrote:
> I agree though I'm still curious if there are still no-threaded
> platforms taking new versions of git. Perhaps we should do the
> depreciation warning you suggested elsewhere and see how much push back
> we get. It's unlikely we'd get lucky
On 10/23/2018 4:28 PM, Jeff King wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 08:05:22PM +0200, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 7:09 PM Jeff King wrote:
In this particular case though I think we should be able to avoid so
much #if if we make a wrapper for pthread api that would
Jeff King writes:
> I also think we may want to make a fundamental shift in our view of
> thread support. In the early days, it was "well, this is a thing that
> modern systems can take advantage of for certain commands". But these
> days I suspect it is more like "there are a handful of legacy
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 08:05:22PM +0200, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 7:09 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > > In this particular case though I think we should be able to avoid so
> > > much #if if we make a wrapper for pthread api that would return an
> > > error or something
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 7:09 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > In this particular case though I think we should be able to avoid so
> > much #if if we make a wrapper for pthread api that would return an
> > error or something when pthread is not available. But similar
> > situation may happen elsewhere
6 matches
Mail list logo
