From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.pnpitalia.it ([212.110.39.242]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j4BLKW17030852 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 21:20:32 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pnpitalia.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 881A23612AE for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 23:20:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.pnpitalia.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (db [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18400-08 for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 23:20:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [1.1.1.153] (cisco.pnp [1.1.1.153]) by mail.pnpitalia.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF3F36127E for ; Wed, 11 May 2005 23:20:32 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <42827723.9010604@pnpitalia.it> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 23:20:35 +0200 From: Francesco Riosa User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] have_NPTL proposal/question X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at db X-Archives-Salt: fcf6e0af-4149-4a4c-99bd-5c1715b08674 X-Archives-Hash: e856b68ae4970946a4af166c3f545309 intro: Having to patch a package to be installed with nptl I've tried this function (yes now I know it's wrong patch conditionally a package if not needed). Only few days later a user complain that the check failed (seem to remember on amd64) . what we have: At the moment have_NPTL is defined in eclass/eutils.eclass, it compile a small test program to check if glibc have nptl support. what I've seen used in at least one other place (modified to be a candidate substitute): case $(getconf GNU_LIBPTHREAD_VERSION | tr abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ) in NPTL* ) return 0 ;; LINUXTHREADS* ) return 1 ;; * ) eerror "unknown libpthread implementation" return 1 ;; esac there are drawbacks on the use of getconfig (that come with glibc) ? Maybe it's not supported from *libc ? This is also important to know (for me ;) because an important package is going to make this check in it' "configure" and having it break on certain gentoo supported ARCHs may be tedious. any hints and/or feedback welcome -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list