glibc source rpm and nptl

Rakesh Patel rapatel at
Sun Nov 30 20:41:39 UTC 2003

So the Fedora Core 1 Kernel for x86 uses NPTL but the glibc for x86 does 

That doesn't seem to make any sense - especially since I spent a bit of 
time trying to rebuild glibc
for Redhat9 until I learned about SPEC files  and how to utilize the GNU 
combinations to rebuild it and finding references to the fact that 
Redhat9 used NPTL [in the kernel and glibc].
Until I configured NPTL and used the SPEC file to properly patch/rebuild 
the glibc [with some other patches I
needed], the resulting glibc would not work with Redhat9 x86 binaries.

I'm just surprised that the glibc SPEC file for fedora now no longer 
configures for NPTL threads even
though the kernel utilizes them. With NPTL being linuxthreads 
compatible, maybe the glibc for fedora uses
linuxthreads to avoid issues with some applications?  Just want to be 
sure that the glibc SPEC files are accurate
for x86. In this case, I really don't have any reasons to rebuild glibc, 
but was seeing if optimizations would
make any difference [using athlon-mp and -O4].  Just seems odd not to 
have glibc not configured to
use NPTL threads [maybe the source rpm is out of date/incorrect?].

Rakesh  Patel.

Jakub Jelinek wrote:

>On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 10:30:37PM -0500, Rakesh Patel wrote:
>>I was attempting to rebuild glibc from the source rpm and noticed the 
>>spec file does not
>>utilize nptl  and does not specify it as an addon, but instead uses the 
>>linuxthreads addon.
>>The Fedora Core 1 announcements indicate that NPTL is used (and the 
>>kernel sources
>>do utilize NPTL). Is the the glibc spec file accurate?  I used both the 
>>original glibc src
>>rpm and the updated rpm [using the updated binary rpm] and both build 
>>without NPTL support.
>Did you use --target i686 ?
>glibc*.i386.rpm certainly doesn't provide NPTL, NPTL doesn't support i386
>	Jakub
>fedora-list mailing list
>fedora-list at
>To unsubscribe:

More information about the fedora-list mailing list