* [gentoo-dev] Re: nptl in make.defaults [not found] ` <1093285423.2330.14008.camel@simple> @ 2004-08-23 19:20 ` Chris Bainbridge 2004-08-23 19:23 ` Peter Johanson 2004-08-24 18:14 ` David Sparks 0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Chris Bainbridge @ 2004-08-23 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-core; +Cc: gentoo-dev On Monday 23 August 2004 19:23, Ned Ludd wrote: > > What about adding use="nptl" to make.defaults then? > bad idea.. It's not well enough supported. Many bugs open that are not > getting resolved. I could find 17 bugs with 'nptl' in the summary. Most of them are invalid; mostly compile errors with old package versions that have since been fixed upstream. #21132 looks like the only serious one, and that only affects proprietary binary software. I've been running nptl for ages (on x86) and have no problems with the other packages mentioned (openoffice, mysql, wine, glibc). -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: nptl in make.defaults 2004-08-23 19:20 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: nptl in make.defaults Chris Bainbridge @ 2004-08-23 19:23 ` Peter Johanson 2004-08-24 18:14 ` David Sparks 1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Peter Johanson @ 2004-08-23 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:20:03PM +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: > On Monday 23 August 2004 19:23, Ned Ludd wrote: > > > What about adding use="nptl" to make.defaults then? > > bad idea.. It's not well enough supported. Many bugs open that are not > > getting resolved. > > I could find 17 bugs with 'nptl' in the summary. Most of them are invalid; > mostly compile errors with old package versions that have since been fixed > upstream. #21132 looks like the only serious one, and that only affects > proprietary binary software. I've been running nptl for ages (on x86) and > have no problems with the other packages mentioned (openoffice, mysql, wine, > glibc). > bug #54603 concerning mono + NPTL is still very valid. Garbage collection is basically completely fscked when using an NPTL glibc. There definitely *are* still bugs related to NPTL. (well, at least one that i'm sure of) -pete > > -- > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list > -- Peter Johanson <latexer@gentoo.org> -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: nptl in make.defaults 2004-08-23 19:20 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: nptl in make.defaults Chris Bainbridge 2004-08-23 19:23 ` Peter Johanson @ 2004-08-24 18:14 ` David Sparks 1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: David Sparks @ 2004-08-24 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Chris Bainbridge wrote: > On Monday 23 August 2004 19:23, Ned Ludd wrote: > >>>What about adding use="nptl" to make.defaults then? >> >>bad idea.. It's not well enough supported. Many bugs open that are not >>getting resolved. > > > I could find 17 bugs with 'nptl' in the summary. Most of them are invalid; > mostly compile errors with old package versions that have since been fixed > upstream. #21132 looks like the only serious one, and that only affects > proprietary binary software. I've been running nptl for ages (on x86) and > have no problems with the other packages mentioned (openoffice, mysql, wine, > glibc). The LD_ASSUME_KERNEL method of using a non-nptl glibc on an app by app basis should be fixed before nptl goes mainstream. Its a requirement for anyone using old, binary-only software. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61128 ds -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ - against Lotus Notes -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <A8660996-F52B-11D8-B3B9-000D93283962@gentoo.org>]
* [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Monday's Managers' meeting [not found] ` <A8660996-F52B-11D8-B3B9-000D93283962@gentoo.org> @ 2004-08-23 20:46 ` Travis Tilley 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Travis Tilley @ 2004-08-23 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Pieter Van den Abeele wrote: > > On 23 Aug 2004, at 19:21, Heinrich Wendel wrote: > >> On Sunday 22 August 2004 16:56, Grant Goodyear wrote: >> >>> <snip> >>> >>> 7. Making udev/2.6 the default on some arch's? (wolf31o) >> >> >> What about adding use="nptl" to make.defaults then? > > > That implies deprecating 2.4. > > Pieter thanks to the power of cascading profiles, the default profile -can- have an nptl sub-profile without much effort. simply add a subdirectory, change some default virtuals for os headers, and add nptl to it's make.defaults. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-08-24 18:14 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <20040822145622.GI4788@roo.grantgoodyear.org> [not found] ` <200408231921.54254.lanius@gentoo.org> [not found] ` <1093285423.2330.14008.camel@simple> 2004-08-23 19:20 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: nptl in make.defaults Chris Bainbridge 2004-08-23 19:23 ` Peter Johanson 2004-08-24 18:14 ` David Sparks [not found] ` <A8660996-F52B-11D8-B3B9-000D93283962@gentoo.org> 2004-08-23 20:46 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Monday's Managers' meeting Travis Tilley
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox