[rrd-developers] Re: NT Version of 1.1-dev code
peter at stamfest.at
Mon Mar 24 18:47:52 MET 2003
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Jake Brutlag wrote:
> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 09:30:15 -0800
> From: Jake Brutlag <jakeb at microsoft.com>
> To: Ian Holsman <rrd.developers at holsman.net>, rrd-developers at list.ee.ethz.ch
> Subject: [rrd-developers] Re: NT Version of 1.1-dev code
> > ps.. can you get the CVS-HEAD to build where you are on win32?
> My current CVS refresh is from 1/29/03, apparently before the
> thread-safety code was added. This compiled on Win32 with VC++ 6.0 once
> I added rrd_nan_inf.c to the project and a #include <math.h> in
> rrd_man_inf.c. But I haven't done any testing with this version on
> Win32. I'll give the tip of tree version a try if I have time later this
In case my thread safety stuff breaks on certain architectures (it is
streamlined for POSIX threads and I was very aware of the possibility of
problems in this area) the suggested solution is to write an
"instantiation" of the rrd_thread_safe.c file for the used thread package.
Being able to use other thread implementations/APIs was the reason to
provide rrd_thread_safe.c and rrd_not_thread_safe.c in order to make this
as modular as possible.
Selection of the proper module to use for the thread package should of
course be taken care of through the configure script.
I wonder: does the non-thread safe version work for those compiling on
Win32? If it does, a proper rrd_thread_safe_win32.c should do the trick,
as this should be the only difference between thread-safe and
Dipl.-Ing. Peter Stamfest UNIX, Networking & Computing Consultant
Tel: +43/699/10711205 Software Development - Internetservices
E-Mail: peter at stamfest.at WWW: http://stamfest.at/
Unsubscribe mailto:rrd-developers-request at list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=unsubscribe
Help mailto:rrd-developers-request at list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=help
More information about the rrd-developers