Re: threading news

* Felix von Leitner <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Now, the question is: is there even a target audience for using
> threading with dietlibc on kernels older than 2.6?  Should we maintain
> the old horrible threading library or abandon it altogether for a
> rewrite supporting all the shiny scalability features from kernel 2.6
> onwards?  That would clean up things considerably and reduce code size
> dramatically, too.

I prefer the full dropping of the old stuff ;)

> Please note that thread local storage only works for static binaries.
> There is a PDF explaining how to do it for dynamic binaries.  That PDF
> is bigger than the current dietlibc tarball.  I'm NEVER going to
> implement that.  If you need TLS and shared libraries, use glibc. :-)

That is also okay - I think.

-- 
regards, TR