PATCH: glibc 2.3.x and errno

[Dan Kegel]

Andreas Mohr wrote:
> I for one would feel much better if we simply rejected that particular
> "broken" glibc version 

Not sure it's broken - it may just be the first version using
NPTL for threads.

 > and supported a *new* glibc method of properly
> interfacing errno things in a newer glibc version...
> (maybe have some "advanced" setting in glibc that enables all sorts of
> funky interfacing capabilities in case a program needs it)
> 
> After all if Wine needs this errno support, then there's probably
> a need for it, so it's glibc's bloody obligation to make sure there's
> proper support IMHO.
> 
> BTW: why did they even choose to abandon a public errno_location ?

You might want to ask that question (very carefully, since Ulrich
is a hothead) on the NPTL mailing list.  See
http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html#threads.nptl
for more info.  My advice: don't try to get glibc to change on
this, figure out how you can adapt.  It'll be easier, believe me.
- Dan

-- 
Dan Kegel
http://www.kegel.com
http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045