Re: pthreads

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

address@hidden (Neal H. Walfield) writes:

> As is quite obvious, the Hurd uses cthreads.  Should I try to maintain
> a cthreads compatibility layer in my pthread implementation (this is
> the way that Mark was leaning)?  An alternative would be to just
> convert the current code to use pthread unconditionally.  If we did
> this, would it be better to provide a simple pthreads layer on top of
> cthreads or to just ignore the incompatibility?

The planned strategy is to totally punt cthreads entirely, for all
platforms.  So it seems to me that we don't really need a cthreads
compatibility layer--however--if you are eager to move on, before we
expunge cthreads from the Hurd source, then you might find one useful.