EV on AIX?
schmorp at schmorp.de
Mon Apr 30 00:42:10 CEST 2012
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 11:41:12PM -0600, Darin McBride <darin.mcbride at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > Hmm, that dds support for xlC, it doesn't really fix anything.
> It fixes this:
> "libev/ev.c", line 941.3: 1506-205 (S) #error "memory fences not defined for
> your architecture, please report"
As do the other "fixes".
> > Or using gcc, or pthreads.
> So it seems that I should be using pthreads already. And ldd confirms:
> So simply using pthreads is not sufficient.
Well, you also have to find the instructions and remove the # error line
in this case, it will just work.
> > Simply insisting on this does not make it so. Again, you have a problem,
> > and it's with your legal department. A libev release cannot fix this
> > problem. Postpone it maybe, hide it maybe, but the problem will not go
> > away.
> Sure, I still have to go through legal for everything else.
I can only repeat myself, the problems you have are between you and your
legal department. Nothing in libev can fix these.
> "Simply insisting" that my employer's lawyers are a problem doesn't help the
Right, but nobody else here on this list can do anything about your
> I'm sorry, I'm not following. You have a fix in cvs that, if it should be
The fix doesn't really fix anything though.
> easier). All I asked at the outset here is if you were planning on making an
> official release of EV that included said fix in the near future.
The problem is that you are confusing a workaround that works around a number
of very artificial and nonsensical rules that you think you need to follow
with a fix for your problem, or any problem.
The change you refer to doesn't fix anything, it's not a "fix".
> Actually, I asked what timeline you were planning on for that release.
Well, you should read your e-mail then, because you didn't ask that at
all, you asked for an AIX fix, and I am not aware of any AIX fix. It
turned out that you are refering to the memory fence support, but it's
confusing, because that doesn't fix either your problem, nor any problem
really, it merely works around your situation, where many work arounds are
> few months, maybe more" or what. I don't need assistance telling me how
> screwed up the legal requirements are, I've been telling that to various
> managers for two years now. While working to improve things, I still have to
> work within the existing framework until then.
Keep in mind that you are aggressivley pushing your legal/lawyer/etc.
problems here, from your very first mail - I didn't bring it up. I am
merely trying to understand what you are talking about, and trying to show
you ways out of your problem.
Bringing up the problems with your legal department and insisting that the
way you are thinking of is the only way to sovle your problem is of little
help in understanding what the real issue is, or how your problem *should*
If you only want to know when the next release is, then you should just
ask that instead of describing how evil your legal department is and why
you think that the only way out of your situation is a libev release
(which isn't true - there are multiple ways to tackle this issue purely
from the technical side, which don't involve patching).
The answer to the question of when libev will be released is: "libev
will be released when it will be released" is the most precise statement
possible. Maybe tomorrow, probably this or next year, but nobody really
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp at schmorp.de
More information about the anyevent