On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:51:53AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> Okay, so what are we supposed to do to ports that are now broken because
> -pthread doesn't exist (e.g. devel/pwlib)?
-pthread is back in current. It just had a little holiday. It's back,
refreshed, eager and willing to do the deed. 8-)
> Is there a simple rule we should follow when trying to fix ports, or do
> we have to think now?
Someone has to think and make a decision. Is simplicity (the -pthread switch)
reason enough to support one thread library by default?
> At the moment, I'm just patching configure files
> to use ${PTHREAD_LIBS} instead of -pthread, and pushing PTHREAD_LIBS
> into the ports' CONFIGURE_ENV.
I don't think that CONFIGURE_ENV should be modified in each port's makefile
to cope with PTHREAD_LIBS. It's supposed to be a ports-wide thing, so it
belongs in bsd.port.mk.
--
John Birrell
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
