glibc/ntpl

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Tue May 25 19:52:24 PDT 2004


Ryan.Oliver at pha.com.au wrote:

>Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>  
>
>>What I really had in mind was building Chapter 5 without any threads at
>>all.  After all, it only affects packages in Chapter 5.  Its the first
>>thing built in Chapter 6.  Don't know if this is reasonable or not...
>>    
>>
>Well, without threads built ch5 you'll run into some interesting fun
>with the gthread support in gcc. You could build without thread
>support in gcc but you'd say goodbye to TLS support.
>
>You could fool gcc to build with thread support by copying
>(IIRC) pthread.h and bits/pthreadtypes.h out of the nptl directory
>( or if linuxthreads add bits/initspin.h as well ) over the top
>of the generic ones (which contain nothing but commented text indicating
>no thread support) but this is a *HACK*.
>
>Of course, people could always test it as much as they want, but for
>one I am not.
>
>There are reasons we build our ch5 toolchain (and ch5 in general) as a
>functional match for what exists in ch6.
>
>This was a core concept in PLFS, self similarity.
>Go your own way at your own risk.
>

OK.  I was just asking the question. 
  -- Bruce




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list