[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license
is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_libpthread]]
IRC, unknown channel, unknown date.
<youpi> btw, the issue with pthread_cancel is tricky
<youpi> I'm afraid there might be no fix
<youpi> clean fix, I mean
<pinotree> oh, hm
<pinotree> where it the problem located, actually?
<youpi> it's a lot more than just one place
<youpi> in some c++ header there is a weak reference to pthread_cancel
<youpi> libpthreadstubs0 provides a weak definition of pthread_cancel, which can suit well
<youpi> problem comes when also linking with a library which pulls libpthread
<youpi> oops no libpthreadstubs0 doesn't provide a weak definition of pthread_cancel
<youpi> it couldn't implement it anyway
<youpi> and the problem here is that the linker seems to be looking for pthread_cancel in the libpthreadstubs0 library, not libpthread
<youpi> and can't find it
<youpi> I don't know how this translate to english, but we're “walking on eggs
<youpi> ” on this issue
<pinotree> i see
<youpi> i.e. we already know we're not respecting the ELF standard
<youpi> we need a feature that is not in the standard to make pthread symbols working
<youpi> the solution would be to integrate libpthread into the glibc
<pinotree> you mean in the sources, but still providing separate libc.so and libpthread.so?
<pinotree> would that be difficult/tricky?
<youpi> because that permits to put pthread_* functions forwarding directly in the glibc, as is done on linux
<youpi> problem is upstream, you know...
<youpi> if we put libpthread there, it'll be difficult for us to maintain it
<pinotree> ah, the friendly ulrich mate?
<youpi> we already have difficults to get almost trivial patches commited
<youpi> and the "yes I'll handle it someday" Roland mate
<youpi> Roland is supposed to be the GNU part maintainer, but he doesn't have a box running at the moment
<youpi> what we could do is to do it in Debian for the moment
<pinotree> iirc eglibc is maintained within git, isn't it?
<pinotree> maybe you could do a hurd branch, putting all the hurd patches and the pthread sources, and then releasing from that
<youpi> we're already moving to something like that, yes
<youpi> at least for all the other glibc patches we have
<youpi> maybe we'll just do that on sourceware actually