[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: multithread CPPFLAGS
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: multithread CPPFLAGS |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:46:15 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Yoann Vandoorselaere wrote:
> > - it does not need to see a thread-aware errno,
> > hence it does not need to compile with THREADCPPFLAGS.
>
> Not using a thread-aware errno from an application that indirectly use
> thread through a library (which use thread-aware errno). Are you
> completely sure this is safe?
Instead of discussing whether I'm "completely sure" and what we can "assume",
can you show a test program that decides the question without any doubt?
Bruno
- Re: Lock module improvement, (continued)
- Re: Lock module improvement, Bruno Haible, 2008/08/14
- Re: Lock module improvement, Bruno Haible, 2008/08/17
- Re: Lock module improvement, Bruno Haible, 2008/08/18
- Re: Lock module improvement, Yoann Vandoorselaere, 2008/08/18
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Bruno Haible, 2008/08/20
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Yoann Vandoorselaere, 2008/08/21
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Bruno Haible, 2008/08/21
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Yoann Vandoorselaere, 2008/08/21
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Matthew Woehlke, 2008/08/21
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Yoann Vandoorselaere, 2008/08/25
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Yoann Vandoorselaere, 2008/08/25
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Matthew Woehlke, 2008/08/25
- Re: multithread CPPFLAGS, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/08/26