[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 00:01:10 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Sebastian Kemper <sebastian_ml@....net>
Subject: Re: Robust shared mutexes?
* Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2016-11-26 17:56:18 -0500]:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:51:05PM +0100, Sebastian Kemper wrote:
> >
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2016-March/119214.html
> >
> > It says musl doesn't have process shared mutexes so one should set
> > apr_cv_process_shared_works=no. I take it that is correct?
>
> No, it's incorrect and I have no idea where that idea came from. I'll
> ask Khem.
>
apr might care about sharing mutexes across i386 vs x86_64 ?
that does not work (glibc ditto)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
