Re: Thread-safe configuration option appears to

As soon as a beta tarball shows up, I'll cut changes for UnixWare for
--enable-threads,
and also to do -D_REENTRANT anyway on UnixWare.

What about Kean's change to allow absolute DT_SONAME's?

Can that get applied, and used for SCO and UnixWare?

LER

--On Monday, August 04, 2003 18:16:02 -0400 Bruce Momjian
<pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

>> Let's not go there. I'm not involved in the IP fight, but I am a USER
>> on that
>> platform, and SCO is thinking ****SERIOUSLY**** about shipping PG on the
>> Platform
>> as part of their extensions offering.
>>
>> What the fr*** harm is it in passing -D_REENTRANT into the libpq build
>> on UnixWare
>> irregardless of the --with-threads* flag?
>>
>> Same argument for allowing the PORT to determine whether to allow/permit
>> the full
>> pathname in for DT_SONAME.
>
> We did have a discussion on whether we should enable threading by
> default, and the issue was that we don't even have enough platforms
> supported at this point, so by running configure with the thread flag,
> you are asking us to generate a threaded libpq and ecpg, and we will
> fail if we can't.
>
> On BSD/OS, that flag does nothing (the binaries are the same), but we
> have the flag so people can know if their libs are thread-safe. I think
> the template files are the way to go at this point. If we support
> threads on all/most of our platforms, we can think about doing something
> by default.

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749