Re: pthreads on Win2k

["Stephen R. Johns" <stephen dot johns at securelogix dot com>]

As I said, I am porting this, and I have been debating this
myself.  It certainly does not seem like a very good idea.
Obviously, the Linux implementers think there is some use.
I can't think of any scenario where this would not be risky
and problematic, but who knows, maybe there is special need
in device drivers, or some equally odd thing that I don't
ever work with.  I will say, even if you can think of a special
case or two where this would be a legit idea, the stuff I am
having to deal with is NOT in any of those categories.  I've
never heard of or seen anything like it before.


Scott McCaskill wrote:

> On the face of it, this seems like a bad idea--why would you want to do
> such a thing?  This isn't derision, I'm just curious.
> 
> On the original subject, I've also been using pthreads on win2k for ~8
> months now and haven't had any problems.  I've only used it on single
> processor machines.
> 
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Stephen R. Johns wrote:
> 
> 
>> Probably not related, but just in case...
>> 
>> I've been trying to port a linux program to pthreadw32, and found
>> a mutex issue/difference.
>> 
>> Linux allows threads other than the locking thread to unlock a mutex,
>> but pthreads does not.  So if you are trying to do that, your
>> unlocks never work.
>>