Re: g_mutex, e_mutex and pthread_mutex in camel?!

Philip Van Hoof <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnome.evolution.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 12:54 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:

> Is there a reason why g_mutex, e_mutex and pthread_mutex are used in a
> mixed may on libcamel?

Note that the GStaticRecMutex can also be used as non-static:

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-list/2002-January/msg00045.html

It looks like recursive non-static mutexes is the only reason why EMutex
is still in place.

I'm willing to replace all those remaining mutexes to GStaticRecMutex if
such a patch would eventually be applied. So are there any remaining
issues with the GLib GThread mutex implementations?

I'd like to do this to further decoupling camel from libedataserver.


> Anyway, I'm getting this segmentation fault on the
> CAMEL_DATA_WRAPPER_UNLOCK call in camel-data-wrapper.c 
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> [Switching to Thread -1226287424 (LWP 16199)]
> 0x00001098 in ?? ()
> (gdb) bt
> #0  0x00001098 in ?? ()
> #1  0x00000012 in ?? ()
> #2  0x00000f40 in ?? ()
> #3  0xb7a3d653 in write_to_stream (data_wrapper=0x8067aa8,
> stream=0x8067c58) at camel-data-wrapper.c:149
> #4  0xb7a3d6d7 in camel_data_wrapper_write_to_stream
> (data_wrapper=0x8067aa8, stream=0x8067a38) at camel-data-wrapper.c:175
> 
-- 
Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend 
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be 
http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.