Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)
Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
From: Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Lee Kindness <lkindness@csl.co.uk>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2003-09-02T17:55:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
--On Tuesday, September 02, 2003 19:53:38 +0200 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > Lee Kindness writes: > >> Bruce Momjian writes: >> > Right. We can't assume because a *_r function is missing that the >> > normal function is thread-safe. > >> That's not our concern - if the OS isn't thread safe we can't do >> anything about it, and to worry about it is an enormous waste of >> development time. > > There is a long way between configure not finding a particular *_r > function and the entire operating system not being thread-safe. There are > many uncertainties along that way, and I believe my point was that the > only way we can get a degree of certainty about the result of a particular > build is that we keep a database of exactly what is required for > thread-safety on each platform. Ok, now, is my statement from a SCO Developer good enough to get thread-safety enabled on UnixWare with only the getpwuid_r() function? LER -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749