On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, grant beattie wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 09:40:37AM +0200, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, David Brownlee wrote:
>>>  	Is there any reason why perl58 should not default to being
>>>  	threaded under NetBSD 2.0?
>>
>> Not really - 2.0 has threads, right?
>
> the target audience for perl-threads is very, very small, and
> historically perl without threads has been much more stable than perl
> with thread support.

 	Is that cross platform, or just related to our native threads?

> I'd be against changing the default because it is likely to result in
> a less stable perl and is only useful for a small number of packages.

 	Then we need a way to make p5-GD work on NetBSD 2.0.

 	The four obvious options we have are:
 	- Default to perl58-threads on NetBSD-2.0
 	- Make p5-GD depend on perl58-thread, which makes for a nasty
 	  surprise when someone installs the non threaded perl then
 	  has to delete it and replace with perl58-thread (which by
 	  default would involve them reinstalling all dependant packages)
 	  when they want to install p5-GD.
 	- Remove freetype support from p5-GD
 	- Make freetype nonthreaded, which probably involves making our
 	  X11 tree nonthreaded.

 	I'll go with any of the above.


-- 
 		David/absolute          -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --