>No, the semantics are the same. The internal implementation may slightly
>differ, I haven't looked in detail. The point is how to handle
>cancellation from a cancelled thread, not how to mark a thread as being
>cancelled. The hurd_thread_cancel function merely exists because there
>isn't any in
Hi!
While the issue is Hurd-specific, non-Hurd people might nevertheless be
able to help here with their glibc/TLS expertise.
I'm working on a patch to move the Hurd's errno from the Hurd-specific
threadvar (in short, a mechanism somewhat equivalent to TLS, using a
portion of space at the beginni
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:44:20AM -0700, Thomas DiModica wrote:
> Most of what I understand is from what Marcus has to say in this thread here:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/hurd-devel/2002-07/msg00010.html
That link explains the problem very well. It's better to keep the
current calls to h
From: Richard Braun
To: Thomas DiModica
Cc: "debian-h...@lists.debian.org" ;
"bdefre...@debian.org"
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: Hurd_condition_wait in glibc libpthreads in Debian
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 03:16:05PM -0700, Thomas DiModica wrote:
> As an aside, Vicente Ara (
