IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2010-07-31
<tschwinge> Other question: how difficult is a NPTL port? Futexes and some kernel interfaces for scheduling stuff etc. -- what else?
<youpi> actually NPTL doesn't _require_ futexes
<youpi> it just requires low-level locks
<youpi> Mmm, it seems to be so only in principle
<youpi> I can see futex names here and there in the generic code
<youpi> looks like Drepper isn't disciplined enough in that area either
<tschwinge> (well, why would he...)
<youpi> I'm not sure we really want to port NPTL
<youpi> Drepper will keep finding things to add
<youpi> while the interface between glibc and libpthread isn't increasing _so_ much
<tschwinge> ... and even less so the interfavce that actual applications are using.
<tschwinge> We'd need to evaluate which benefits NPTL would bring.
IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-08-05
<gnu_srs> Hi, looks like kfreebsd are now using an NPTL-based pthread
library: FBTL, http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2013/07/msg00060.html
<gnu_srs> Anything of interest for porting to Hurd? See also
<azeem> Petr could've been more verbose in his announcements
<pinotree> and there's
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/open_issues/nptl.html in our wiki
<azeem> well, it seems to work fine for kFreeBSD:
<azeem> and http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2013/07/msg00138.html