Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 11:43:15AM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > Unless major flaws in the design are found this code is intended to
> > become the standard POSIX thread library on Linux system and it will
> > be included in the GNU C library distribution.
> 
> If the comment that this doesn't work with the stable kernel is correct, I
> consider that a pretty major flaw. Unlike the kernel and NGPT which are
> developed using an open source model with lots of eyes on the WIP, this
> was done and then released whole with the decision to include it in the
> standard library already made. Having any part of glibc not work with the
> current stable kernel doesn't seem like such a hot idea, honestly.

glibc supports .note.ABI-tag notes for libraries, so there is no problem
with having NPTL libpthread.so.0 --enable-kernel=2.5.36 in say
/lib/i686/libpthread.so.0 and linuxthreads --enable-kernel=2.2.1 in
/lib/libpthread.so.0. The dynamic linker will then choose based
on currently running kernel.
(well, ATM because of libc tsd DL_ERROR --without-tls ld.so cannot be used
with --with-tls libs and vice versa, but that is beeing worked on).

That's similar to non-FLOATING_STACK and FLOATING_STACK linuxthreads,
the latter can be used with 2.4.8+ or something kernels on IA-32.

> > - - The general compiler requirement for glibc is at least gcc 3.2.  For
> >    the new thread code it is even necessary to have working support for
> >    the __thread keyword.
> > 
> >    Similarly, binutils with functioning TLS support are needed.
> > 
> >    The (Null) beta release of the upcoming Red Hat Linux product is
> >    known to have the necessary tools available after updating from the
> >    latest binaries on the FTP site.  This is no ploy to force everybody
> >    to use Red Hat Linux, it's just the only environment known to date
> >    which works.
> 
> Of course not, it's coincidence that only Redhat has these things readily
> available, perhaps because this was developed where no other vendor knew
> it existed and could have support ready for it.

Because all of glibc/gcc/binutils TLS support was developed together (and
still is)? All the changes are publicly available, mostly in the
corresponding CVS archives.

	Jakub