svn commit: r200797 - head/lib/libc/stdtime

[Marius Strobl]

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 03:18:11PM +0100, Roman Divacky wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 09:16:48PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > In message: <20091221220004.GA42400 at alchemy.franken.de>
> >             Marius Strobl <marius at alchemy.franken.de> writes:
> > : On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 02:59:21PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > : > On Monday 21 December 2009 2:43:23 pm John Baldwin wrote:
> > : > > Author: jhb
> > : > > Date: Mon Dec 21 19:43:23 2009
> > : > > New Revision: 200797
> > : > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/200797
> > : > > 
> > : > > Log:
> > : > >   Use _once() to initialize the pthread key for thread-local storage to hold
> > : > >   the results of localtime() instead of using a pthread mutex directly.
> > : > 
> > : > It would probably be simpler to use TLS for this instead, but I'm not sure if
> > : > we have working TLS on all supported platforms.
> > : > 
> > : 
> > : At least not on arm and sparc64 as the in-tree binutils predate
> > : GNU TLS support for these.
> > 
> > We really need newer binutils in the tree.
> > 
> > And we need a way to compiler gplv3 binutils into the system for folks
> > that can do that without consequences...  But many modern processors
> > need to have the gplv3 version of binutils and that will be a
> > continuing problem.  One advantage of FreeBSD is its integration,
> > rather than having to play version whack-a-mole like you do with
> > embedded Linux.
> 
> well... llvm provides its own assembler so if the need for newer binutils
> comes from need of newer as I believe llvm can help here. or is the linker
> the problem?

Assuming LLVM properly supports the architecture in the first
place ...

Marius