From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1d5d51400901251734o5e7e74a9v13d30e65e5fd27f9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:13:34 +0800 Message-ID: <1d5d51400901261313u3e076468qa1406690783e33b8@mail.gmail.com> From: Fernan Bolando To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] plan9port openbsd 4.4 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 89541698-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Russ Cox wrote: >> The plan9port code depends on the operating system's pthreads >> being real kernel-level threads, not a fake user-level simulation. >> The user-level simulations are not good enough, because >> on the x86 they cut corners and use the stack pointer >> to locate the thread-local state. The Plan 9 threaded >> programs manage their own stacks, making it impossible >> for the user-space simulations to find their thread-local state. >> >> Most Linux distributions switched to real threads (i.e., dropped >> LinuxThreads in favor of NPTL) around the time they switched >> to the 2.6 kernel. FreeBSD switched in the FreeBSD 5 release. >> >> Last I had heard, OpenBSD was still plodding along with >> user-level threads. Until they fix that, programs like acme >> will not run. >> >> Russ >> >> > On 1/27/09, Iruata Souza wrote: > can't remember on 4.4, but 4.3 did run acme fine. > > > -- > iru > > Yes, actually acme runs fine, I just get an occasional burp. -- http://www.fernski.com