On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:51:53AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > Okay, so what are we supposed to do to ports that are now broken because > -pthread doesn't exist (e.g. devel/pwlib)? -pthread is back in current. It just had a little holiday. It's back, refreshed, eager and willing to do the deed. 8-) > Is there a simple rule we should follow when trying to fix ports, or do > we have to think now? Someone has to think and make a decision. Is simplicity (the -pthread switch) reason enough to support one thread library by default? > 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. I don't think that CONFIGURE_ENV should be modified in each port's makefile to cope with PTHREAD_LIBS. It's supposed to be a ports-wide thing, so it belongs in bsd.port.mk. -- John BirrellReceived on Wed Sep 24 2003 - 01:15:41 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:23 UTC