[ELDK] glibc change for eldk 3.1.1

[Levend Sayar]

Let me add something

We do the same build of very same code of BerkelyDB + openldap on PC which runs 2.6 kernel.
Everything is just fine there. But on ppc platform, it is not. So what is different between two platform ?
kernel and glibc.

So I prefered less risky way. I mean changing glibc 2.3.1 to 2.3.3. Changing kernel from 2.4 to 2.6 , as you know, has more impact 
...

_lvnd_
 (^_^)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Levend Sayar" <levend.sayar at karel.com.tr>
To: "Detlev Zundel" <dzu at denx.de>; "Wolfgang Denk" <wd at denx.de>
Cc: <eldk at lists.denx.de>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [ELDK] glibc change for eldk 3.1.1


> Hi, Detlev.
>
> Yes you are right. pthread_mutex_* functions are available in LinuxThreads. Indeed, we are using that pthread functions in our 
> tcp/ip server on ppc also.
> But that mutexes can be used for intra process synchronization, namely between threads.
>
> You can build BerkeleyDB+openldap with ELDK 3.1.1. But when you run them, BerkeleyDB says "function not implemented". Since it 
> needs inter process
> synchronization. I think POSIX pthread standard talks about mutexes which can be used inter process synchronization, but 
> LinuxThreads implementaion of pthreads does not have this kind of mutex.
> I suspect NPTL has. Even if I could add NPTL support, maybe the result would be same for openldap.
>
> BerkeleyDB needs synchronization between multi processes. Its configure script says many alternatives for --with-mutex switch such 
> as
>
> POSIX/pthreads
> POSIX/pthreads/private
> POSIX/pthreads/library
> POSIX/pthreads/library/private
> Solaris/lwp
> UI/threads
> UI/threads/library
> 68K/gcc-assembly
> AIX/_check_lock
> Darwin/_spin_lock_try
> ALPHA/gcc-assembly
> ARM/gcc-assembly
> HP/msem_init
> HPPA/gcc-assembly
> ia64/gcc-assembly
> MIPS/gcc-assembly
> PPC/gcc-assembly
> ReliantUNIX/initspin
> S390/cc-assembly
> S390/gcc-assembly
> SCO/x86/cc-assembly
> SGI/init_lock
> Solaris/_lock_try
> *Solaris/_lock_try/membar
> *Sparc/gcc-assembly
> Tru64/cc-assembly
> UNIX/msem_init
> UNIX/sema_init
> UTS/cc-assembly
> *x86/gcc-assembly
> *x86_64/gcc-assembly
> UNIX/fcntl
> win32
> win32/gcc
>
> I tried many but the result does not change too much.
>
> So my question turns to "is there any one running openldap on ppc using 2.4 kernel ?"
>
> _lvnd_
> (^_^)
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Detlev Zundel" <dzu at denx.de>
> To: "Wolfgang Denk" <wd at denx.de>
> Cc: "Levend Sayar" <levend.sayar at karel.com.tr>; <eldk at lists.denx.de>
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 12:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [ELDK] glibc change for eldk 3.1.1
>
>
>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>>>> I thought that Posix Pthread implementation of NPTL would be better
>>>> than LinuxThreads. So I tried what I said before.
>>
>> Yes, the NPTL implementation is superior to the LinuxThreads
>> implementation.  To give one example, POSIX demands that all threads
>> have the same process id.  This is not the case with LinuxThreads.
>>
>> But on the other hand, LinuxThreads also implements mutexes so for your
>> original problem it might be interesting to find out _why_ exactly
>> OpenLDAP thinks that LinuxThreads does not support mutexes.
>>
>>> There is either pthread, which has nothing to do with NPTL, or NPTL.
>>> If you want NPTL, then you go for a LInux 2.6 kernel.  There is no way
>>> around this.
>>
>> Well actually both LinuxThreads and NPTL implement the posix thread API
>> - pthread for short.
>>
>> Cheers
>>  Detlev
>>
>> -- 
>> Soon in a source code repository near you.
>> --
>> DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
>> HRB 165235 Munich,  Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
>> Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: dzu at denx.de
>