2003-05-01 06:14:51

by Christoph Hellwig

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: must-fix list for 2.6.0

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 04:59:14PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I think it's happening down inside the old linuxthreads library. No idea
> who, what, where or why.

No, they're doing it themselves. The RedHat OO package has a patch to
fix this mess (and two dozend other patches to work around OO braindamage..)


2003-05-01 06:38:20

by Shawn

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: must-fix list for 2.6.0

This is a very useful conversation for the OO guys themselves to hear
about. Anyone care to make them aware of the will of the kernel gods?

On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 02:27, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 04:59:14PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I think it's happening down inside the old linuxthreads library. No idea
> > who, what, where or why.
>
> No, they're doing it themselves. The RedHat OO package has a patch to
> fix this mess (and two dozend other patches to work around OO braindamage..)

2003-05-01 10:02:18

by Christoph Hellwig

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: must-fix list for 2.6.0

On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 01:49:56AM -0400, Shawn wrote:
> This is a very useful conversation for the OO guys themselves to hear
> about. Anyone care to make them aware of the will of the kernel gods?

If redhat fixed it I assume they sent it upstream. OTOH if you read
the RH bashing on the OO lists it's another question whether it was
applied.. :)

2003-05-01 10:34:04

by Alan

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: must-fix list for 2.6.0

On Iau, 2003-05-01 at 11:14, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 01:49:56AM -0400, Shawn wrote:
> > This is a very useful conversation for the OO guys themselves to hear
> > about. Anyone care to make them aware of the will of the kernel gods?
>
> If redhat fixed it I assume they sent it upstream. OTOH if you read
> the RH bashing on the OO lists it's another question whether it was
> applied.. :)

OpenOffice can't even get its website working with ECN even though
nowdays its an IETF standard. That probably means they can't even
exchange email with some of the kernel developers let alone we hope
they are listening.

I am sure given reason they can be persuaded to fix their sched_yield
stuff however.

2003-05-01 15:32:16

by Robert Love

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: must-fix list for 2.6.0

On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 02:27, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> No, they're doing it themselves. The RedHat OO package has a patch to
> fix this mess (and two dozend other patches to work around OO braindamage..)

Right, Open Office is its own problem.

But LinuxThreads uses sched_yield() to do synchronization (yuck), since
it lacked something like futexes at the time.

Robert Love