RE: (no subject)

I think the reasons are quite clear in Saurabh's announcement. NGPT was
initiated to implement mainly in user space because of the lack of kernel
(2.4) support. Since 2.5 has added many features for threads, it is wiser to
reduce the burden of user library implementation.

Here I want to show my respects to the NGPT group for its great work and the
influence on the community. I also quite appreciate the courageous decision
of no splitting within the community.


Bingwei Liu -- Not speaking for my employer -- all opinions are my own (and
my fault)


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Aron Rubin [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: 2003?3?20? 22:10
>To: Steve Arons; [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [pthreads-devel] (no subject)
>
>
>Steve Arons wrote:
>> It's quite a sad day when a better technology--ngpt--is 
>dropped.  One 
>> thing the free software community can't afford is to put warm fuzzy 
>> feelings ahead of performance.  Or rather--dress up the community's 
>> reliance on glibc as an endorsement of its quality.  Linux 
>would benefit 
>> more from a robust, efficient, standards-compliant libc than from a 
>> better pthreads at this point.  But in the meantime, if you 
>happen to 
>> have a winning pthreads package, why abandon it?
>
>Because the M:N paradigm has some critical flaws in it.
>
>Aron
>