Re: Linux threads support

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb at cygnus dot com>]

On Aug 27,  5:35pm, Mark Kettenis wrote:

> Anyway, I'm now at a point where I think it functions better than the
> current threads support, and I really need to get it more widely
> tested.  I see two possibilities:
> 
> 1. Post a patch and hope that people take the trouble of applying it.
> 
> 2. Put the new code directly in the CVS (possible in a seperate
>    branch).
> 
> I think option 1 is doomed to fail.  For option 2 I'd like some
> opinions (especially from the maintainers of the various Linux ports):

I agree with you regarding option 1.  For option 2, I think you should
just check in your changes on the trunk.  It's scary, but I don't
think it'll get tested otherwise.

> * Should the stuff be checked in on a seperate branch?

As noted above, I don't think a separate branch would be advisable. 
In fact, I think it's be more likely that people would test your
changes if you posted a patch than if you created a branch with your
changes.

> * How important is support for older Linux systems (pre-libthread_db,
>   i.e. pre glibc-2.1.3) give the fact that GDB has never had any
>   satisfactory threads support for these systems, and older versions
>   of the LinuxThreads library contain many critical bugs?

I don't see any need to offer thread support for older Linux systems. 
gdb should still be able to debug non-threaded programs on these
systems though.