libpthread version bump

[Scott Long]

Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Scott Long wrote:
> 
> 
>>Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>>>>Having lived through the std{io,err,out} libc snafu, the
>>>>libm.so.2 snafu, and now the libc.so.5/libpthread.so.1
>>>>problem, I will once again suggest that *ALL* library
>>>>version numbers should be bumped when a new branch is
>>>>created.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes.  When a library version is bumped, *ALL* libraries that depend on
>>>it need to be bumped.  Sadly, this has proven to be too difficult
>>>because it would create an unholy maintanence problem for the ports.
>>>
>>>Warner
>>
>>Well, there is indeed a problem at the moment of libc being bumped for
>>6-current but not libpthread.  However, I think that the particular
>>problem with the fs/gs change goes above and beyond this problem.  So,
>>we have about 2 months to sort this all out.  Any volunteers?
> 
> 
> I'm not sure I fully understand the problem, but can't you
> just make libpthread avoid using *setbase() if the symbol
> isn't available and use the ldt functions as a fallback?
> 
> 	#pragma weak	i386_get_gsbase
> 	static void *have_gsbase = i386_get_gsbase;
> 
> 	...
> 
> 	if (have_gsbase == NULL) {
> 		/* use ldt stuff */
> 	}
> 	else {
> 		/* use i386_get_gsbase */
> 	}
> 
> You just need something else to force the symbol i386_get_gsbase
> to be loaded; the #pragma weak won't force it to be loaded even
> if it is present.
> 

If that's all that it takes, then that's fine by mean.  I don't 
understand the mechanics of the problem well enough to comment
otherwise.  Peter?

Scott