On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:41:51PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > Kumba wrote: > >Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > >> > >>Ping? > >> > > > >Doesn't this need the glibc side of things to be effective?, or is it > >testable w/o that component? It is testable independently. Also, I posted the glibc bits last week. > I think the main point is that it should not break existing code. Of course. It doesn't. The only thing it could possibly break would be four-argument clone (it's supposed to be five argument, and the missing argument conventionally goes in the middle... oops). But I strongly believe nothing is yet using the four-argument form so I synced MIPS with the rest of the world. > We need NPTL support in all three of GCC, Linux kernel and glibc before > it can be tested. If it doesn't break existing code, I think it should > go in the kernel so that we have something on which to test gcc and glibc. GCC support was committed two weeks ago, BTW. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC
