Subj : Re: NPTL and Static Linking
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : David Schwartz
Date : Tue Mar 08 2005 04:44 pm


<bluujack@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1110328245.379909.312960@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

>>     Such an application wouldn't run on machines that couldn't
>> support NPTL
>> (due to processor type or kernel version).

> I could understand making the default archive for static
> linking to be the LinuxThreads version, but to not even include
> a .a for NPTL seems draconian, particularly since the complexity
> of actually obtaining a source distribution of glibc and building
> your own .a is not for the casual developer (or Joe Sixpack, as
> Ulrich would say, although the Joe Sixpacks I know are unlikely
> to be doing much of anything at a linux command line).

    Talk to your distribution provider.

> Well, I agree with the principle, if not with the policy. Reasonable
> people might want to build a statically linked application with
> NPTL, even without expecting to distribute to uncontrolled kernels.
> Seems like, as with most things in the linux world, the prevailing
> philosophy of "Here's a gun, don't shoot yourself," would be the
> preferable policy.
>
> Seems like it's the distribution maintainer's call, though, so I'll
> take it up with Debian.

    Yep. They may well have one, just not installed by default.

    DS

.