Re: puzzling Gnome-ERROR
- From: jgotts old tqstats com
- To: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- cc: gnome-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: puzzling Gnome-ERROR
- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 02:58:57 -0500
In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Havoc Pennington writes:
>> Either way, Havoc's code works around the problem, I guess.
>Only by amazing coincidence. What kind of crack-rock mkdir()
>implementation contains "return 1"?
>> My conclusion: threads and GNOME are a lot of trouble. I'll be using fork()
>> in all future projects.
>GNOME isn't thread safe but shouldn't stop you from using threads
>outside the GUI. The GNOME 2.0 file manager will be using threads. So
>if you have thread problems they are genuine bugs (though if you don't
>want to be the bug-finder I understand). :-)
>In this particular case I think you've discovered that libc5 sucks
>though... a well-known fact.
I'm not sure this is the fault of libc 5. After all, from memory libgnome gets
compiled with -D_REENTRANT on glibc 2.x. autoconf/automake probably have some
kind of broken scheme to figure out whether this flag is needed and leave it
out when you compile with libc 5. I'm guessing here; my fix has been to hack
the generated Makefile.
libc 5 may suck, but not for this reason.
And the only package I've ever run into out of hundreds that doesn't work with
libc 5 is gfloppy. The fix is probably trivial but I haven't bothered to track
it down since I prefer to format my floppies on the command line. ;-) gfloppy
author, please do not take offense.
John GOTTS <email@example.com> http://www.linuxsavvy.com/staff/jgotts
] [Thread Prev