Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:07:53PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > >> I agree with all of your points. >> >> However, we've already established a precedent in many other cases that >> FOSS cases can integrate without necessarily taking the same steps that >> we would require of software developed internally. >> > > But surely there are limits. Having the GNU Pth library on the system > for other apps to link with is bad. Using the GNU Pth library in GPG is > less bad. Why not just require that the i-team at least not deliver Pth > compilation links, or, better, statically link Pth into GPG? > Does GNU Pth replace -lpthread? If so then there is a serious problem and I'd have to suggest reopening the case. I was under the impression that it did not interfere with applications that correctly link against normal POSIX pthreads.
Reading the manuals, it doesn't look like Pth will interfere with applications which make correct use of POSIX threads. - Garrett > Nico >
