|
From: Michael M. <ma...@su...> - 2005-03-18 17:36:01
|
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Michael Matz wrote:
>
> >I've asked some kernel people here. I'm not aware of any non-standard
> >changes of the kernel itself. AFAIK the 9.1 is as normal NPTL as it gets
> >;) OTOH I'm no expert in that. I've looked at the archives for this
> >thread, and just have one additional clarification: 9.1 uses the kernel
> >2.6. Without any LD_ASSUME_KERNEL hackery it will use the
> >/usr/lib/nptl/ libs (one should perhaps ensure that this is the case). At
> >least in the beginning of this thread it seems as if Jeremy was arguing
> >from a 9.1-is-linuxthreads perspective.
> >
> That's what the traces Julian sent me indicate; they're using the
> non-NPTL forms of clone(), etc. Maybe there's just something strange
> with his installation? OOo on his system is using /lib/pthread.so.
That's the non-nptl libpthread. I misinformed above: the nptl libraries
itself (the DSOs used by ld.so) are in {/usr,}/lib/tls. The libraries in
{/usr,}/lib are the linuxthread libraries. The files in /usr/lib/nptl are
only used at linktime (not runtime), in case one really needs the extra
functions provided by the nptl libs, which usually is not the case.
Anyway, if Julians OOo uses /lib/libpthread.so this indeed means that
LinuxThreads are used, not NPTL. I wonder why this happens without
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL thingies, but let's ignore this. But still it's the case
that this is running on a 2.6 kernel. I've not yet heared back from my
kernel colleagues, but perhaps the kernel 2.6 behaves a little bit
different from 2.4, when used by linuxthreads (instead of nptl as it's
supposed to be)?
Ciao,
Michael.
|