Re: [Mingw-cross-env-list] Solving the Pthreads issue

[Volker Grabsch]

Tony Theodore <address@hidden> schrieb:
> On 7 May 2010 08:06, Volker Grabsch <address@hidden> wrote:
> >    A)  Keep packages "gcc" and "pthreads" separate as they are.
> >
> >    B)  Entangle "gcc" and "pthreads" in order to try to get
> >        OpenMP support.
> >
> > What do you think about that? I'd like to collect as many opinions
> > as possible.
> 
> AFAIK, libgomp is a runtime library and can be built entirely
> separately from gcc - it doesn't need to be tangled in with it. I'd
> rather see a libgomp.mk that uses the gcc tarball (possibly gcc-core
> if untarring time is important) and depends on pthreads.

That's a good point, and it's definitely worth a try!

I think we should stick with the "big" GCC package, because
separately downloading GCC-core would cause unnecessary network
traffic.

(As a general guideline, saving network traffic is more important
 than saving build time in mingw-cross-env. That's why we prefer
 bzip2 archives over the faster-to-uncompress gzip archives.)

However, the main questions remains: Should we patch libgomp
to work with static phreads, or should we build pthreads as
a shared library?

> I haven't tested this exactly, but have built pthreads and libgomp
> together in a separate makefile - that was mostly motivated by code
> organisation and turnaround time in testing. I'm happy to do some
> experimenting - is there a small test program to verify openmp support
> is working?

I don't have an OpenMP test program, sorry.

Maybe someone else on this list could provide one?

IIRC there is at least one person on this list who requested
OpenMP support, and thus should be able to write a quick
"Hello World" that uses OpenMP.


Greets,

    Volker

-- 
Volker Grabsch
---<<(())>>---
Administrator
NotJustHosting GbR