On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 06:41:31 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> @magicus why can't we just use `-pthread` everywhere? My recollection is
>> that `-pthread` both sets compiler directives needed for pthread programming
>> and links to libpthread, so it seems to be what we should be using. ??
>
>> Anothe
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 15:56:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that
>> it's possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags
>> for enabling posix threads.
>>
>> This work is a continuation of the work done
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 13:53:31 GMT, Antonio Vieiro wrote:
>> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that
>> it's possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags
>> for enabling posix threads.
>>
>> This work is a continuation of the work done by G
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 10:39:27 GMT, snake66 wrote:
> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that it's
> possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags for
> enabling posix threads.
>
> This work is a continuation of the wor
d for the full JDK, and set at the configure stage.
>
> Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
> Co-authored-by: Greg Lewis
>
> [1]:
> https://github.com/battleblow/jdk23u/commit/dbd90aa8ab0b7f5e4865864a7c63d975daacabf4
snake66 has updated the pull request incrementally with
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 14:15:38 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that
>> it's possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags
>> for enabling posix threads.
>>
>> This work is a continuation of the work done by Gr
Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that it's
possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags for
enabling posix threads.
This work is a continuation of the work done by Greg Lewis in [1], but
generalized for the full JDK, and set at the conf
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 12:46:25 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Abstracting this out seems reasonable to me, though I should say I thought we
> already used `-pthread` rather than `-lpthread`.
I noticed there were a few places that used `-pthread` by default. I left these
alone in this PR.
---
