> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 17:45:14 -0700,
Konrad Schroder said:
> The benefits of adopting xlocale would be:
>
> * Per-thread locale settings
> * Working LC_COLLATE settings
> * Use localedef(1) instead of mklocale(1), which allows...
> * Take locale definitions directly from CLD
> On Thu, 19 May 2016 10:36:57 +0200,
Martin Husemann said:
>> Adding real implementation (instead of the ENOSYS stub) is desired,
>> of course...
> In this case: is it even possible in a portable way for all of our
> architectures?
Yes.
Easiest way is to call a locking system call
Forgot to say one thing...
>>>>> On Thu, 19 May 2016 12:44:57 +0900, SODA Noriyuki said:
>> How about other functions? Does it make sense to follow POSIX standard
>> to implement the missing functions in netbsd?
> In general, it's not recommended to add a s
> On Wed, 18 May 2016 20:31:08 -0700,
Charles Cui said:
> How about other functions? Does it make sense to follow POSIX standard
> to implement the missing functions in netbsd?
In general, it's not recommended to add a stub function which returns
ENOSYS (i.e. "Function not implemente
> On Thu, 19 May 2016 01:13:09 +0200,
Martin Husemann said:
> int pthread_barrierattr_setpshared(pthread_barrierattr_t *attr,
>int pshared)
> {
> return EINVAL;
> }
I think the following is better:
int pthread_barrierattr_setpshared(pthread_barrierattr_t *attr,
i
