From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/14407 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Question about absence of pthread_getname_np Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 00:57:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20190717045731.GK1506@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="138187"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-14423-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 17 06:57:47 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hnc0h-000ZsV-5Q for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 06:57:47 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 9525 invoked by uid 550); 17 Jul 2019 04:57:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 9497 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2019 04:57:44 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:14407 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:20:09AM -0400, Robert Oliveira wrote: > Hello, > > I'm simply curious about the absence of a pthread getter method > (phtread_getname_np) in musl, since it seems the setter method > (pthread_setname_np) has been around for a while. This only came up because > of a reference to this method in a NodeJS library that uses some cpp > bindings (when using an Alpine image for running Node). > > Here's a relevant Github link regarding the matter, for what it's worth: > https://github.com/RuntimeTools/omr-agentcore/issues/90 > > Thanks in advance for your time. It's come up before, and there were reasons for not doing it, but not terribly compelling ones. I promised to look at it again this release cycle and I suspect that'll end with it getting added. Rich