From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263319AbTJESUu (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2003 14:20:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263316AbTJESUt (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2003 14:20:49 -0400 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:57736 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263319AbTJESUs (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2003 14:20:48 -0400 Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2003 19:16:30 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: Krzysztof Benedyczak , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Manfred Spraul , pwaechtler@mac.com, Michal Wronski Subject: Re: POSIX message queues Message-ID: <20031005181630.GA26958@mail.shareable.org> References: <3F80484A.3030105@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F80484A.3030105@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ulrich Drepper wrote: > > In another words: is our implementation in the position > > of NGPT or better? ;-) > > I don't understand. Why NGPT and what about "position"? He is asking if the work will be wasted effort that is dismissed or superceded, like NGPT was. > If you mean > including a solution in the runtime (librt), sure, this will happen. > But not before I see a solution in the official kernel. Speaking of librt - I should not have to link in pthreads and the run-time overhead associated with it (locking stdio etc.) just so I can use shm_open(). Any chance of fixing this? -- Jamie