[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: TLS. nptl and gcc/glibc/binutils



At Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:45:15 -0700,
Jeff Bailey wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 12:51:43PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> 
> >    I am wondering if there is a gameplan on adding the support for
> > enabling TLS support in the devtools in sid. In particular, in trying
> > to build the current debian glibc cvs 2.3.2-1 release I noticed that
> > linuxthreads support was broken upstream. Uli seems to think this will
> > happen more frequently now that they are focused on nptl and paying
> > less attention to the old linuxthreads code.

Please check the latest debian glibc cvs.  I put a hack to avoid this
problem.  Look at glibc23-linuxthreads-fix.dpatch.  I'm currently
investigating it, but if you know something, please try to hack it.
Is this problem fixed in the latest upstream?

> >    Do we plan to add backports of the TLS changes to gcc 3.2.3 as
> > redhat has done or should we stick with gcc 3.3 if we want to build
> > glibc with TLS support? Just curious what the plan is on this
> > transition.
> 
> My thought is that gcc-3.3 will be out soon enough for us to use that. 

But for future coming stable gcc-3.3, we should start to support tls
and nptl, and I already start to investigate.  I think we should have
two libc6: libc6-linuxthreads (linuxthreads) and libc6-nptl (nptl).
This means that now the name libc6 becomes virtual package or
something.

> The biggest problem is that Debian's kernels don't have futex support. 
> I've heard that RedHat has some solution for automatically detecting
> which they should use, but I don't know anything about it.

I hope someone intent to package redhat9's 2.4 Ingo's backport patch.
BTW, I use the latest kernel on my some machines, so it's not problem
for me.

Regards,
-- gotom



Reply to: