[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <651EE05A-C592-45C3-BAB6-A6CDDDAF98A4@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:36:50 -0800
From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Sebastian Kemper <sebastian_ml@....net>
Subject: Re: Robust shared mutexes?
> On Nov 26, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:51:05PM +0100, Sebastian Kemper wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 05:24:43PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:49:44PM +0100, Sebastian Kemper wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> I'm cross-compiling for OpenWRT/LEDE and have this variable
>>>> apr_cv_mutex_robust_shared. Should I set it to yes or no with musl? I've
>>>> searched around but found conflicting infos. One post said there's no
>>>> shared mutex support in musl
>>>
>>> Do you have a link for that? If there's incorrect information I'd like
>>> to reply and see if it can be corrected.
>>
>> Hello Rich,
>>
>> Thank you very much for the reply!
>>
>> I looked for the link and it turns out it was an error on my part. The
>> post wasn't referring to robust shared mutexes. It was regarding process
>> shared mutexes
>>
>> 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.
>
IIRC it was not musl but papering over apr specific issue. I never got time to really dig in
to root cause it.
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.
