tytso@mit.edu wrote:
> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 07:28:22 -0700
> From: David Ford <david@kalifornia.com>
>
> Well, how about backing out the threads change until somebody is
> ready to fix everything involved. I haven't the time, depth of
> knowledge, or rep for this. At present the only thing it seems to do
> is break things. With 2.4 around the corner, I can't imagine a flock
> of hungry geeks happy that their threading is reason for frequent
> reboots on a supposed "stable"*1 kernel.
>
> I didn't realize things had changed that broke the old threading model.
> Did Linus do more than add support for the new thread groups? I didn't
> think any that had changed that would break the old LinuxThread
> programs.
>
> - Ted
Something seems to have changed, most all my threaded programs that I use
now act strangely. Pan seems oblivious to net commands, xmms won't play,
host just stalls, the list goes on.
They all appear to be disconnected from themselves, they hang/stall, and
when you kill them you must kill -9, term doesn't accomplish anything, and
they become zombies and won't go away until you reboot.
I haven't modified libc/linuxthreads, the only thing that has changed is
the kernel. So I'm laying my odds there :)
-d
-- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 21:00:19 EST