Bug#475101: obsolete linuxthreads requirement
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> Here's an attempt at that. I'm not sure if this says everything that
> needs to be said, but I'm not sure what else to say.
> I considered saying, as Kurt does above, that two libraries could be
> provided, one with thread support and one without, but this poses some
> serious problems because both libraries could be loaded into the same
> process space and then conflict. Doing this properly requires symbol
> versioning or some other similar mechanism, and at that point I think
> we're getting into something that's too difficult and specific to describe
> in Policy. I think I'd rather just let the "should" rather than "must"
> provide wiggle-room for that.
> Objections or seconds?
This change has now been merged for the next release.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: