On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 09:11 -0800, David Schwartz wrote:
> > > Really? So 'errno' refers to a process global in both cases?!
> > > (Note that I
> > > said the "definition", not the implementation.)
>
> > Maybe we didn't understand each other - I don't say, that glibc without
> > multithread support and with it is the same. I say that linking single
> > threaded library which is simply reentrant but doesn't use any locking
> > itself to a multithreaded app is 100% safe thing to do.
>
> I think you are confusing two different definitions of "single threaded".
> You may mean by "single threaded" that no threading functions are ever
> called. This is a source code issue. The source either calls threading
> functions or it doesn't.
>
> But what the OP and I mean by single threaded is *compiled* single threaded.
> That is, without specifying whatever options the compiler wants to make code
> multi threaded.
I know that other operating systems/compilers/C runtime libraries are
different. And in fact I don't know in what environment Paul Sheer's
application will be running, but as I wrote above on current gcc+glibc
as used by most widespread Linux distributions there are no extra
options which are needed if you want to make code multithreaded. The
glibc's are always compiled to be threadsafe (with locking stubs in
place) which are replaced with real locking code when libpthread is
linked in. So gcc threadedapp.c -o threadedapp -lpthread is everything
what is needed to compile and link multithreaded executable.
Again, I know that the situation with other compilers/libcs/OSes can be
and is very different.
--
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
Turkish proverb
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
