On Monday 29 September 2008 11:04:27 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 02:36:32PM +0200, Hans-Christian Egtvedt wrote: > >On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 16:57:20 -0500 > > > >Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I'd like to apply the following small patch as a start on at least > >> deprecating the hell out of LINUXTHREADS_OLD. All it does is stop it > >> showing up in menuconfig, and make the symbol default to n. > >> > >> We really do need to get down to one pthreads implementation before > >> we start adding nptl-threads, and getting the new we have a better > >> chance of maintaining actually widely tested is an important part of > >> that. > >> > >> Comments? > > > >It will remove threads support for AVR32 architecture, so I would say > >no to apply it. > > > >I agree that we should aim for all architectures to have NPTL, but only > >after all the architectures actually are working with this thread > >library IMHO. > > agree. > Rob, if you want to deprecate linuxthreads.old after the 0.9.30 release > then please go to the NPTL branch and add support for i386, powerpc, > m68k etc, etc either against nptl or linuxthreads.new.
I think you're confusing NPTL with linxthreads.new. I'm happy to push for deprecating linuxthreads.new if nobody's ever used it that has a better chance of success. Neither pthreads implementation is NPTL or has anything to do with other SVN forks, I don't know why people keep confusing 'em... Rob _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
