Andreas Mohr wrote:
I for one would feel much better if we simply rejected that particular
"broken" glibc version
Not sure it's broken - it may just be the first version using NPTL for threads. > and supported a *new* glibc method of properly
interfacing errno things in a newer glibc version... (maybe have some "advanced" setting in glibc that enables all sorts of funky interfacing capabilities in case a program needs it) After all if Wine needs this errno support, then there's probably a need for it, so it's glibc's bloody obligation to make sure there's proper support IMHO. BTW: why did they even choose to abandon a public errno_location ?
You might want to ask that question (very carefully, since Ulrich is a hothead) on the NPTL mailing list. See http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html#threads.nptl for more info. My advice: don't try to get glibc to change on this, figure out how you can adapt. It'll be easier, believe me. - Dan -- Dan Kegel http://www.kegel.com http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045
