libgcj and the NPTL posix threads implementation

Mon Mar 1 21:42:00 GMT 2004

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > If "we" == "Linux distribution vendors", then yes definitely. But
> > I'd expect nearly everyone building and using their own gcj would
> > want Anthony's patch.
>> I don't think so. I have worked fairly recently on systems that have
> a working NPTL but gdb doesn't grok NPTL threads.

Oh, yuck! I wasn't considering broken systems at all. (Does NTPL require
TLS, or vice versa? Both require kernel support, I understand...)
> It should be simple to use a function pointer to switch _Jv_ThreadSelf
> to different personalities, and the runtime cost would not be huge.

What can you reliably test for, besides catching a signal if TLS isn't
available?
Jeff