RE: sigaction & pthread_sigmask

[drifting@pioneerwireless.ca]

Sorry for the confusion... I forgot that the LGPL had a different
name in the past....


Quoting "Burkhardt, Glenn" <Glenn.Burkhardt@goodrich.com>:

> Thank you, Ross.  Sorry I wasn't paying closer attention.
>
> The timer code is available here:
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-linuxthreads-2.5.tar.bz2
>
> The code I posted is from an older code set, but the current is
> virtually the same, and is clearly marked with the "GNU Lesser General
> Public License".
>
> In any case, I believe that basic facilities like signals and timers
> that are bound up in a threads implementation would be a good addition
> to pthreads-win32.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pthreads-win32-owner@sourceware.org
>> [mailto:pthreads-win32-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Ross Johnson
>> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:28 PM
>> To: John E. Bossom
>> Cc: pthreads-win32@sourceware.org
>> Subject: Re: sigaction & pthread_sigmask
>>
>> The timers code is from the GNU C library, which the comments
>> in the included header file says is LGPL, so it would be ok to use.
>>
>> However, if the contributors to pthreads-win32 were to agree
>> in future to change to a license other than the LGPL or GPL
>> then this code would need to be completely removed or replaced.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Ross
>>
>> John E. Bossom wrote:
>> >
>> > Your contribution has comments that it is licensed under the GNU
>> > Public License. This, if included in pthreads-win32, would
>> upsurp the
>> > LGPL license designation of pthreads-win32 and thus prevent
>> commercial
>> > use of pthreads-win32 (something LGPL permits provided it
>> is used as a
>> > shared library - use of the static library renders the license GPL,
>> > though) Are you the original author of this code? Would you
>> consider
>> > changing the license? Have you already published the package as GPL?
>> >
>> > Ross, comments?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > John.
>> >
>> > Quoting "Burkhardt, Glenn" <Glenn.Burkhardt@goodrich.com>:
>> >
>> >> I think so.  Semaphores might seem out of scope, but they're an
>> >> integral part of concurrent programming.  Signals need to
>> be thread
>> >> smart, so they're naturally part of a thread implementation.
>> >> So are timers - attached is a pthreads compatible version of Posix
>> >> timers, but it's lacking the function of sending a signal
>> to a thread
>> >> when a timer has expired.
>> >>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: pthreads-win32-owner@sourceware.org
>> >>> [mailto:pthreads-win32-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of William
>> >>> Ahern
>> >>> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 1:58 AM
>> >>> To: pthreads-win32@sourceware.org
>> >>> Subject: sigaction & pthread_sigmask
>> >>>
>> >>> Would it be worthwhile to submit a sigaction, sigwait,
>> sigprocmask,
>> >>> pthread_sigmask patch? Or are signals strictly outside
>> the scope of
>> >>> the project?
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm working on sigaction and sigwait
>> implementations--using atomic
>> >>> CAS operations for async-safety--intended for a portable kqueue
>> >>> library. But the library depends on
>> >>> pthreads-w32 anyhow, and it would be cleaner to simply
>> patch upstream.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>