Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-21 Thread Roumen Petrov
Adrian Bunk wrote: On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:00:38PM +0200, Roumen Petrov wrote: [SNIP] Kwasi Mensah wrote: I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00

Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-20 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:00:38PM +0200, Roumen Petrov wrote: > [SNIP] > Kwasi Mensah wrote: > I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but > LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00136.htm

Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-19 Thread Roumen Petrov
[SNIP] Kwasi Mensah wrote: I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00136.html . Out of curiosity, is there a reason this patch didn't get into that main line? T

Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-18 Thread Andrew W. Nosenko
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:28, Roumen Petrov wrote: > Andrew W. Nosenko wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:05, Roumen Petrov >>  wrote: >> >>> >>> Kwasi Mensah wrote: >>> I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already

Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-16 Thread Roumen Petrov
Andrew W. Nosenko wrote: On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:05, Roumen Petrov wrote: Kwasi Mensah wrote: I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00136.html .

Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-15 Thread Andrew W. Nosenko
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:05, Roumen Petrov wrote: > Kwasi Mensah wrote: >> >> I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but >> LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per >> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00136.html . >> >> Out of curiosity, i

Re: [xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-15 Thread Roumen Petrov
Kwasi Mensah wrote: I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00136.html . Out of curiosity, is there a reason this patch didn't get into that main line? This is w

[xml] LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED and HAVE_PTHREAD_H mismatch

2010-11-15 Thread Kwasi Mensah
I ran into the issue where HAVE_PTHREAD_H is defined but LIBXML_THREAD_ENABLED wasn't. The fix was already submitted as per http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2005-August/msg00136.html . Out of curiosity, is there a reason this patch didn't get into that main line? This is with libxml2 2.7.8 on M