This is the mail archive of the
newlib@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the newlib project.
Re: vfscanf in newlib
- To: cygwin-developers-digest-help at cygwin dot com, cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com, newlib at sources dot redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: vfscanf in newlib
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:25:18 -0400
- References: <987861904.20126.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <3AE1C5B2.B63F2B54@ece.gatech.edu>
- Reply-To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:38:58PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
>Didn't somebody already do a threadsafeness audit of newlib? If so,
>then we don't want to break threadsafeness with these changes. I'm not
>familiar with threaded code in C; what is neccessary to insure that a
>given function is both reentrant and threadsafe (if a block of code is
>threadsafe it is automatically reentrant, but a reentrant block is not
>necessarily threadsafe, right?)
That's right.
AFAIK, newlib is not guaranteed to be thread safe.
So, I guess that Cygwin is, by extension, not really thread safe either.
I can think of a few functions in cygwin that are not thread safe, in
fact. The enviroment manipulation is not thread-safe. I don't believe
that vfork is thread safe. I'm sure that there are many others.
cgf