From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15765 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2009 23:39:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 15755 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jun 2009 23:39:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from qw-out-1920.google.com (HELO qw-out-1920.google.com) (74.125.92.145) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:39:39 +0000 Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so1403275qwk.24 for ; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 16:39:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.53.205 with SMTP id n13mr6043237qag.270.1244417977230; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 16:39:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <54b165660806171627i489ec78at85e8576762fe97af@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Static Library Initialization (again?) From: Ramiro Polla To: pthreads-win32@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact pthreads-win32-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: pthreads-win32-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009/txt/msg00027.txt.bz2 Hi, On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Ramiro Polla wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:27 PM, Brian Cole wrote: >> It looks like I'm running into the same problem as others. I need to >> distribute a static library with pthreads-win32 included without >> requiring end-users of our library to call any pthreads-win32 specific >> attach or detach code. Based on previous posts to the mailing list it >> looks like the boost library has dealt with this before: >> http://sourceware.org/ml/pthreads-win32/2008/msg00022.html >> >> I also found this bit of code inside the Google performance tools: >> #ifdef _MSC_VER >> >> // This tells the linker to run these functions. >> #pragma data_seg(push, old_seg) >> #pragma data_seg(".CRT$XLB") >> static void (NTAPI *p_thread_callback)(HINSTANCE h, DWORD dwReason, PVOI= D pv) >> =A0 =A0=3D on_tls_callback; >> #pragma data_seg(".CRT$XTU") >> static int (*p_process_term)(void) =3D on_process_term; >> #pragma data_seg(pop, old_seg) >> >> #else =A0// #ifdef _MSC_VER =A0[probably msys/mingw] >> >> // We have to try the DllMain solution here, because we can't use the >> // msvc-specific pragmas. >> >> >> #endif =A0// #ifdef _MSC_VER >> >> Any reason pthreads-win32 can't use these same mechanisms to initialize = itself? >> >> Why can't DllMain be used for this? MSDN seems to imply that DllMain >> is called for static libraries >> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682583.aspx): >> "The lpReserved parameter indicates whether the DLL is being loaded >> statically or dynamically." >> >> I just looked through boost and found their implementation >> (boost-trunk/libs/thread/src/win32/tss_pe.cpp). Any objection to me >> creating a patch based on this code for pthreads-win32? > > I attached an ugly but working patch for this. I haven't tested > building pthreads with MSVC but the initialization code worked on a > standalone test app. > > I added a new make clean GC-autostatic to build the library. > > make clean GC-static tests pass. I also tested a bit with FFmpeg (but > not extensively). > > I'm sure it can be dramatically improved (comments, documentation, > stress test, etc), but as a start it's good enough. For some reason I didn't get John E. Bossom's reply in my inbox, so I'm quoting it here: > Second, please beware that simply taking solutions from other open > source components has the potential to taint the intellectual property > rights of this open source component. open source doesn't mean free to > copy... both Google and Boost are released under license and use of > their code is subject to their respective license terms. > pthreads-win32 had chosen to release under the LGPL in order to permit > use by commercial software in addition to open source projects. > However, commercial companies can come under fire for using open > source components with questionable lineage. Some commercial companies > will not touch an open source component if the maintainer does not > maintain a list of all contributors and can prove the code base is not > tainted. I used boost as a reference: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/trunk/libs/thread/src/win32/tss_pe= .cpp The header reads: // (C) Copyright Aaron W. LaFramboise, Roland Schwarz, Michael Glassford 20= 04. // (C) Copyright 2007 Roland Schwarz // (C) Copyright 2007 Anthony Williams // (C) Copyright 2007 David Deakins // Use, modification and distribution are subject to the // Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying file // LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt) The FSF affirms the boost license is GPL compatible, and from my interpretation of the boost license, it is also LGPL compatible. Whatever code is mine in that patch I license it as wtfpl < http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ >. Ramiro Polla