- Original Message -
From: "Roland McGrath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Barry deFreese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: _POSIX_THREADS in
> I won't define it until we have a real libpthread implementat
> > I won't define it until we have a real libpthread implementation that
> > interacts correctly with libc and has all the right hairy semantics.
> > An extra libpthread that is not integrated with libc will never be a true
> > POSIX implementation.
>
> This is going to be a dumb question, but wh
- Original Message -
From: "Roland McGrath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael Banck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: _POSIX_THREADS in
While reading the patch I noticed that you #defined _POSIX_THREADS t
> While reading the patch I noticed that you #defined _POSIX_THREADS to -1
> in it. I thought we have a posix thread implementation provided by
> libpthread, so I am a bit confused. Is this about something else?
I won't define it until we have a real libpthread implementation that
interacts corr
Hi Roland,
I included your recent patch overhauling bits/posix_opt.h to Debian's
glibc package as _POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS is needed to be defiend in
order to build libX11 properly.
While reading the patch I noticed that you #defined _POSIX_THREADS to -1
in it. I thought we have a posix thre
