On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 02:48:58PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > That I found worrying. What is the added benefit for the loss of > > portability? You now reference 2 relatively system specific kind of > > data structure, where we used to reference only the xmlMutex one which > > was portable. And i don't see why, you need to do this for the goal stated > > before. > > The problem is that we need to use pthread_t / pthread_create APIs for > other parts of libvirt. libxml2 doesn't provide any portability layer > for threads - Oh there is a good reason for this :-) > only for mutexes. Any platform which has pthread_t, already > has pthread_mutex_t, so although in theory the pthread_mutex_t is less > portable than xmlMutex, in practice the overall portability is the same > due to the constraint of needing pthread_t. <grin/> ... I see, Okay +1 Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list