Re: Fixing -pthreads (Re: ports and -current)

From: Sheldon Hearn <>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 11:51:53 +0200
On (2003/09/23 19:35), Daniel Eischen wrote:

> The applications is free to link to whatever it wants;
> we're not changing that.  If it wants to link to 1:1
> libthr or whatever, then it had better be sure to use
> -lthr because -pthread won't do it regardless of whether
> it is a NOOP or not.

Okay, so what are we supposed to do to ports that are now broken because
-pthread doesn't exist (e.g. devel/pwlib)?

This discussion has gone around in circles and I haven't read every
message, but it's pretty obvious there's a lot of confusion.

Is there a simple rule we should follow when trying to fix ports, or do
we have to think now?  At the moment, I'm just patching configure files
to use ${PTHREAD_LIBS} instead of -pthread, and pushing PTHREAD_LIBS
into the ports' CONFIGURE_ENV.

Received on Wed Sep 24 2003 - 00:51:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:23 UTC