| 1 |
Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>On Wednesday 11 May 2005 05:20 pm, Francesco Riosa wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>>what we have: |
| 7 |
>>At the moment have_NPTL is defined in eclass/eutils.eclass, it compile a |
| 8 |
>>small test program to check if glibc have nptl support. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>hasnt this been outgrown ? people should `use nptl` now i think |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
yes and no, |
| 16 |
no, 2005.0 still default to -ntpl and -ntplonly |
| 17 |
yes, it's used only by mono project ebuilds (grep has spoken) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
>>there are drawbacks on the use of getconfig (that come with glibc) ? |
| 22 |
>>Maybe it's not supported from *libc ? |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
>well i'd point out that glibc is the only libc atm to implement NPTL ... but |
| 27 |
>then i'd point out someone is working on it for uClibc ... |
| 28 |
>-mike |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
mmh ok, btw all variant of glibc had getconf ? |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives