diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/packaging_libpthread.mdwn')
| -rw-r--r-- | service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/packaging_libpthread.mdwn | 236 |
1 files changed, 236 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/packaging_libpthread.mdwn b/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/packaging_libpthread.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..171dc7a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/packaging_libpthread.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@ +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011, 2012 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 +License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] + +[[!tag open_issue_libpthread open_issue_glibc]] + +[[!toc]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2010-07-31 + + <tschwinge> My idea was to have a separate libpthread package. What do you + think about that? + <youpi> in the long term, that can't work with glibc + <youpi> because of the thread stub stuff + +[[libpthread_dlopen]], for example. + + <youpi> it's not really possible to keep synchronized + <youpi> because you have to decide which package you unpack first + <youpi> (when upgrading) + <tschwinge> Hmm, how is that different if two shared libraries are in one + package vs. two packages? It isn't atomic either way? Aren't sonames / + versioned library packages solving that? + <tschwinge> ... for incompatible forward changes? + <youpi> that'd be a mess to maintain + <youpi> Drepper doesn't have this constraint and thus adds members of + private fields at will + <tschwinge> OK, but how is it different then if the libpthread is in the + Hurd package? + <youpi> I'm not saying it's better to have libpthread in the Hurd package + <tschwinge> OK. + <youpi> I'm saying it's useless to package it separately when Drepper makes + everything to have us put it along glibc + <tschwinge> Then, to goal is to have it in glibc? + <tschwinge> OK. :-) + <tschwinge> OK, I can accommodate to that. Isn't not that we'd want to + switch libpthread to something else so quickly. + <tschwinge> So our official goal is to have libpthread in glibc, at least + for Debian purposese? + <youpi> for any port purpose + <tschwinge> Ack. + <youpi> provided you're using glibc, you're deemed to ship libpthread with + it + <youpi> because of the strong relations Drepper puts between them + <youpi> (just to remind: we already have bugs just because our current + libpthread isn't bound enough to glibc: dlopen()ing a library depending + on libpthread doesn't work, for instance) + <pinotree> yeah, pthread-stubs is linked to almost everywhere -lpthread + isn't used + <pinotree> (would be nice to not have those issues anymore...) + <tschwinge> So -- what do we need to put it into glibc? We can make + libpthread a Git submodule (or move the code; but it's shared also for + Neal's viengoos, so perhaps the submodule is better?), plus some glibc + make foo, plus some other adaptions (stubs, etc.) + <tschwinge> Does that sound about right, or am I missing something + fundamental? + <youpi> I actually don't know what a git submodule permits :) + <youpi> looks like a good thing for this, yes + <tschwinge> Unfortunately I can't allocate much time at the moment to work + on this. :-/ + <youpi> well, as long as I know where we're going, I can know how to + package stuff in Debian + <tschwinge> That sounds like a plan to me. libpthread -> glibc as + submodule. + <youpi> (note: actually, the interface between glibc and the libpthread is + the responsibility of the libpthread: it gives a couple of .c files to be + shipped in libc.so) + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-21 + + <youpi> had you tried to build libpthread as a glibc addon? + <tschwinge> youpi: No, I only know about libpthread in Hurd build system, + and libpthread stand-alone (with the Auto* stuff that I added), but not + yet as a glibc add-on. + <youpi> k + <youpi> I'm trying it atm + <tschwinge> Oh, OK. + <youpi> that should fix the no-add-needed issue in gcc/binutils, as well as + the pthread_threads assertion errors in threaded plugins + <youpi> (once I add forward.c, but that part should not be hard) + <pinotree> that means also less use of pthread-stubs^ + <pinotree> ? + <youpi> tschwinge: do you remember whether sysdeps/mach/bits/spin* are used + by anybody? + <youpi> they are half-finished (no __PTHREAD_SPIN_LOCK_INITIALIZER), and + come in the way when building in glibc + <youpi> pinotree: rid of pthread-stubs yes + <pinotree> \o/ + <tschwinge> youpi: You mean sysdeps/mach/i386/machine-lock.h? No idea + about that one, sorry. + <youpi> I'm talking about libpthread + <youpi> not glibc + <tschwinge> Oh. + <tschwinge> sysdeps/i386/bits/spin-lock.h:# define + __PTHREAD_SPIN_LOCK_INITIALIZER ((__pthread_spinlock_t) 0) + <tschwinge> Anyway, no idea about that either. + <youpi> that one is meant to be used with the spin-lock.h just below + <youpi> +-inline + <youpi> also, I guess signal/ was for the l4 port? + <tschwinge> youpi: I guess so. + <youpi> tschwinge: I have an issue with sysdeps pt files: + sysdeps/hurd/pt-getspecific.c is not looked for by libc ; symlinking into + sysdeps/mach/hurd/pt-getspecific.c works + <youpi> we don't have a non-mach sysdeps directory? + <pinotree> youpi: if you add sysdeps/mach/hurd/Implies containing only + "hurd", does sysdeps/hurd work? + <youpi> ah, right + <pinotree> youpi: did it work? (and, it was needed in sysdeps/mach/hurd, or + in libpthread/sysdeps/mach/hurd?) + <youpi> pinotree: it worked, it was for libpthread + <youpi> good: I got libpthread built and forward working + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-23 + + <youpi> phew + <youpi> confirmed that moving libpthread to glibc fixes the gcc/binutils + no-add-needed issue + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-08-07 + + <tschwinge> Also, the Savannah hurd/glibc.git one does not/not yet include + libpthread. + <tschwinge> But that could easily be added as a Git submodule. + <tschwinge> youpi: To put libpthread into glibc it is literally enough to + make Savannah hurd/libpthread.git appear at [glibc]/libpthread? + <youpi> tschwinge: there are some patches needed in the rest of the tree + <youpi> see in debian, libpthread_clean.diff, tg-libpthread_depends.diff, + unsubmitted-pthread.diff, unsubmitted-pthread_posix_options.diff + <tschwinge> The libpthread in Debian glibc is + hurd/libpthread.git:b428baaa85c0adca9ef4884c637f289a0ab5e2d6 but with + 25260994c812050a5d7addf125cdc90c911ca5c1 »Store self in __thread variable + instead of threadvar« reverted (why?), [...] + +..., and 549aba4335946c26f2701c2b43be0e6148d27c09 »Fix libpthread.so symlink« +cherry-picked. + + <braunr> tschwinge: is there any plan to merge libpthread.git in glibc.git + upstream ? + <tschwinge> braunr, youpi: Has not yet been discussed with Roland, as far + as I know. + <youpi> has not + <youpi> libpthread.diff is supposed to be a verbatim copy of the repository + <youpi> and then there are a couple patches which don't (yet) make sense + upstream + + +## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-02-08 + + <tschwinge> I also have it on my (never-ending) agenda to add libpthread to + the tschwinge/Roger_Whittaker branch and/or propose it be added upstream + (as a Git submodule?). + <pinotree> imho a git submodule could be a solution, if glibc people would + accept it + <pinotree> if so, libpthread.git would need proper glibc/x.y branches to + follow glibc + <tschwinge> Yep. + <tschwinge> I though that would be the least invasive approach for glibc + upstream -- and quite convenient for us, too. + <pinotree> after all, git submodules don't track branches, but point to + specific commits, no? + <tschwinge> Correct. + <tschwinge> So we can do locally/in Debian whatever we want, and every once + in a while update the upstream glibc commit ID for libpthread. + <pinotree> so we could update the git submodule references in glibc when + we've tested enough libpthread changes + <tschwinge> Just like when committing patches upstream, just without + pestering them with all the patches/commits. + <tschwinge> Yep. + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-11-16 + + <pinotree> *** $(common-objpfx)resolv/gai_suspend.o: uses + /usr/include/i386-gnu/bits/pthread.h + <pinotree> so the ones in the libpthread addon are not used... + <tschwinge> pinotree: The latter at leash should be useful information. + <pinotree> tschwinge: i'm afraid i didn't get you :) what are you referring + to? + <tschwinge> pinotree: s%leash%least -- what I mean was the it's actually a + real bug that not the in-tree libpthread addon include files are being + used. + <pinotree> tschwinge: ah sure -- basically, the stuff in + libpthread/sysdeps/generic are not used at all + <pinotree> (glibc only uses generic for glibc/sysdeps/generic) + <pinotree> tschwinge: i might have an idea how to fix it: moving the + contents from libpthread/sysdeps/generic to libpthread/sysdeps/pthread, + and that would depend on one of the latest libpthread patches i sent + + +# libihash + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-11-16 + + <pinotree> also, libpthread uses hurd's ihash + <tschwinge> Yes, I already thought a little bit about the ihash thing. I + besically see two options: move ihash into glibc ((probably?) not as a + public interface, though), or have libpthread use of of the hash + implementations that surely are already present in glibc. + <tschwinge> My notes say: + <tschwinge> * include/inline-hashtab.h + <tschwinge> * locale/programs/simple-hash.h + <tschwinge> * misc/hsearch_r.c + <tschwinge> * NNS; cf. f46f0abfee5a2b34451708f2462a1c3b1701facd + <tschwinge> No idea whether they're equivalent/usable. + <pinotree> interesting + <tschwinge> And no immediate recollection what NNS is; + f46f0abfee5a2b34451708f2462a1c3b1701facd is not a glibc commit after all. + ;-) + <tschwinge> Oh, and: libiberty: `hashtab.c` + <pinotree> hmm, but then you would need to properly ifdef the libpthread + hash usage (iirc only for pthread keys) depending on whether it's in + glibc or standalone + <pinotree> but that shouldn't be an ussue, i guess + <pinotree> *issue + <tschwinge> No that'd be fine. + <tschwinge> My understanding is that the long-term goal (well, no so + long-term, actually) is to completely move libpthread into glibc. + <pinotree> ie have it buildable only ad glibc addon? + <tschwinge> Yes. + <tschwinge> No need for more than one mechanism for building it, I think. + <tschwinge> Hmm, this doesn't bring us any further: + https://www.google.com/search?q=f46f0abfee5a2b34451708f2462a1c3b1701facd + <pinotree> yay for acronyms ;) + <tschwinge> So, if someone figures out what NNS and this commit it are: one + beer. ;-) |