This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Threads, glibc, and all that
- To: law at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: Threads, glibc, and all that
- From: hjl at lucon dot org (H.J. Lu)
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 08:28:52 -0800 (PST)
- Cc: drepper at cygnus dot com, hjl at lucon dot org, jason at cygnus dot com, mmitchell at usa dot net, egcs-bugs at cygnus dot com
>
>
> I don't see closure on this issue yet, but I think I have something
> to contribute :-)
>
> In message <r2ogzvo4s0.fsf@happy.cygnus.com>you write:
> > Well, the patch is ok. But the hack shouldn't be installed
> > unconditionally (only if the problem is real)
> So can we write a test for this? Remember, we don't have autoconf
> to help us.
That is not a problem.
>
> > and how to remove it the next time?
> If we go with that patch, then I'd recommend we only install it
> in the egcs-1.0.x branch -- we fix the mainline tree in the
> "right" way, whatever that is.
We use the same test to see if it is needed or not.
>
> Thus the band-aid's lifespan is only as long as egcs-1.0.x's life
> span.
>
> > This is an isolated problem which might for now be fixed with a
> > comment on the problem in the README.
> That's another possibility.
>
> Again, I'm leaving the decision in the hands of Jason, HJ, Ulrich
> and Mark if he wants to get involved. I'm not qualified to render
> a decision based on the pure technical merits of any proposed patch.
>
I will send in a patch in a day or 2.
--
H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.org)