However the behavior of lib/libpthread is exactly this behavior. It checks
for a supported arch and then moves on if it's not there.

So, prior art would support that this is the correct thing to do.

James

>
>
>"Valeriy E. Ushakov" <uwe@ptc.spbu.ru> writes:
>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 12:44:46 -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>> 
>> > I think the intent before was to deliberately break such arches and
>> > force them to make pthreads work.
>> 
>> This intent is not communicated -
>
>Jason has said this several times on multiple lists including
>source-changes, though.
>
>Perry
>
>> neither in the WARNING, nor in the
>> code (e.g. there's no explicit "false" or something).  More over, the
>> warning is worded as "skipping", which clearly hints that the
>> intention is to just, uhm, skip it.
>> 
>> [Note to self: need to commit few syntax errors into the drivers I
>> consider "experimental"]
>> 
>> SY, Uwe
>> -- 
>> uwe@ptc.spbu.ru                         |       Zu Grunde kommen
>> http://www.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/            |       Ist zu Grunde gehen
>> 
>
>-- 
>Perry E. Metzger		perry@piermont.com
>
>
>