pthreads on Win2k
Stephen R. Johns
stephen.johns@securelogix.com
Fri Mar 23 07:13:00 GMT 2001
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.
>>
More information about the Pthreads-win32
mailing list