Re: FreeBSD threads list suggestion (was libthr and 1:1 threading.)

Peter Wemm wrote:
> Terry Lambert wrote:
> 
> > KSE mailing list, starting Monday or so:
> > ] We still haven't heard from jeff with regard to the process
> > ] signal mask removal.
> 
> We can add new mailing lists really easily now - it takes about 20-30 seconds.
> Would it be worth adding a freebsd-threads and/or freebsd-kse type list
> where it is a bit higher profile?

Probably a threads or even a threads-arch list.

I think the KSE people are happy off on the InterJet hosted list
that Julian has been running forever, but the introduction of the
libthr code has thrown a new element out there.  It's not technically
under the KSE umbrella.

My own big concern is that KSE not be abandoned, just because Linux
uses 1:1 and some Solaris engineers thought they could reduce their
bug-count by not supporting a more complex (and useful) model.


The  problem is that libthr wasn't supposed to compete with KSE,
but there are people posting as if it does, and the only shared
forum is where the postings were made.  Most of these people are
historical Linux threading model advocates who are tired of waiting
for KSE, or "if it doesn't work in 30 days, rip it out" types.  Some
things take time.

In any case, it's definitely worth moving this type of discussion off
-current, IMO.

Maybe even banning it (and the questions that started it) on -current
altogether.

-- Historical footnote --

I think we would have had the same problem in 1993/4, if we had enough
people, when 386BSD/FreeBSD rejected the SVR3 fixed mapping shared
libary model, in favor of a BSD shared libary/PIC model.  It took a
relatively long time to get the PIC model, and the SVR3 implementation
was done for a long time (PIC required compiler work by Jeffrey Hsu
to be practical, which took until almost June 1994).

-- Terry