On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Michael Edenfield wrote:
>
> > * Ian Dowse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030924 12:03]:
> > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel
> > > Eischen writes:
> > > >On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Scott Long wrote:
> > > >> PTHREAD_LIBS is a great tool for the /usr/ports mechanism, but doesn't
> > > >> mean anything outside of that.
> > > >
> > > >That just meant it makes it easier to maintain ports so that
> > > >they are PTHREAD_LIBS compliant (they would break when linked).
> > > >I know it has no bearing on 3rd party stuff.
> > >
> > > Just to throw one further approach out on the table, below is a
> > > patch that makes gcc read from a file to determine what library to
> > > associate with the -pthread flag. It's a hack of course, and probably
> > > neither correct or optimal. If you want to make -pthread mean libkse,
> > > create an /etc/pthread.libs that looks like:
> >
> > I was looking through gcc last night to see how conceptually difficult
> > it would be to do something like this. But instead of a file, I was
> > thinking of this process:
> >
> > * if env("PTHREADS_LIBS") then LDFLAGS += PTHREADS_LIBS
> > * elseif fileexists("libpthread") then LDFLAGS += -lpthread
> > * elseif fileexists("libthr") then LDFLAGS += -lthr
> > * elseif fileexists("libc_r") then LDFLAGS += -lc_r
> > * else error("Threading not supported.")
>
> Out of all the suggestions (aside from making -pthread a NOOP),
> this is my favorite one. I would also make -pthread a NOOP
> when building shared && dynamic.
I didn't think of it, but something like this also lets
me set PTHREAD_LIBS to "" which would effectively become
a NOOP.
--
Dan Eischen
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
