Bruno Haible writes:
> This program (and the underlying gnulib 'nproc' module) is IMO too simplistic.
>
> First of all, is the program meant to be a hardware inspection tool (like
> "hwinfo --cpu")? Or is meant to be an auxiliary program for helping shell
> scripts that want to dispatch tasks on
Giuseppe Scrivano wrote:
> I went for `core-count'. This is the first version of the new program,
> it is a simple wrapper around the gnulib nproc module
This program (and the underlying gnulib 'nproc' module) is IMO too simplistic.
First of all, is the program meant to be a hardware inspection
Thomas Guyot-Sionnest wrote:
> The builds are now complaining about a missing rpl_open symbol.
> ...
> Any idea what's wrong?
First, you can determine whether the problem is in gnulib or in your package.
Run
$ gnulib-tool --test --with-tests open
If this fails on Solaris 9, the problem is in gn
Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > - There is no reason for GCC to warn about foo().
>
> Probably Eric is using -Wstrict-prototypes:
>
> `-Wstrict-prototypes (C and Objective-C only)'
> Warn if a function is declared or defined without specifying the
> argument types. (An old-style fun
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > The default thread stack size is:
> > - glibc i386, x86_64 7.4 MB
>
> Even when -lrt is added?
Yes, sure, I get the same results whether the program is linked with -lpthread
or with -lpthread -lrt. librt is not meant to modify the behaviour of
libpthread.
Bruno
