Subject: Re: libpthread
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Sean Davis <email@example.com>
Date: 06/20/2003 02:08:59
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 01:55:11AM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> Honestly, I do not think it was a good decision on core's part to allow
> the pthread code to come in in a state in which it would render the
> preexisting SMP functionality so unstable as to be useless in a multiuser
> environment, certainly not if it was going to stay that way for *months*
> on end.
I agree wholeheartedly. I have no SMP machines, but I do run -current and
use the native pthreads. Those threaded applications that run *at all*
usually need me to set PTHREAD_ERRORMODE to ignore, and others just freeze
up, if they don't cause a kernel panic. nathanw_sa should not have been
merged until it was at least something close to stable. I don't think the
current state of affairs (especially on SMP machines, from what I read on
the lists) counts as stable by any definition of the word.
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign Sean Davis
X Against HTML aka dive
/ \ Email!