[Lcdproc] lis driver fails to compile

[Daryl F]

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:04:31 +0000
Rene Wagner <rw@nelianur.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 00:10 -0500, Daryl F wrote:
> > Ah, I was just an innocent babe in the woods. Then out from behind a
> > tree jumped the _Threads_Wolf_. After reading about threading and
> > it's evolution in Un*x variants, esp.
> > http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html it seems that I can't have just one
> > implementation for all. 
> > If libpthread is used it seems it will eventually be obsolete in
> > Linux because of the progress on NPTL. And if I use NPTL only, it is
> > unclear when, or if, FreeBSD will support it.
> 
> As far as Linux is concerned, you can use the POSIX threads interface
> provided by libpthread with both the old LinuxThreads kernel/glibc
> implementation and the new NPTL implementation doing the actual work
> for you. In fact, LinuxThreads is now obsolete on most architectures
> and distributions ship with NPTL nowadays.
> 
> So, on Linux there's no need to worry about pthread_create
> disappearing or not working.
> 
> FreeBSD support is a different story. NPTL being Linux specific
> kernel/glibc code doesn't make a lot of sense in FreeBSD (except 
> perhaps for a binary compatibility layer). The Linux and FreeBSD
> schedulers are both unique in their own ways, so a direct port seems
> unlikely (and undesired due to different licensing).
> 
> I'm moderately sure though that there is POSIX threads support in
> FreeBSD (regardless of the implementation behind it). If the
> pthread_create variant compiles on FreeBSD, that will probably 
> be good enough for now since the code can only be tested once there
> are FreeBSD users using the corresponding hardware anyway.
> 
> Differences in OS implementation details are indeed evil, but usually
> POSIX is there to protect you from the need to worry about them :)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rene
> 

Rene,

Thanks for the insight. I will remove the clone() call entirely and
rely solely on pthread_create().

Regards, Daryl