From: snarfy AT goodnet DOT com
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: New threads package available!
Date: 16 Oct 1996 15:38:55 GMT
Organization: GoodNet
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <542vif$9b0@news.goodnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: goodnet.com
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

>
>                      Re: New threads package available!
>                                       
>   From: Leath Muller <leathm AT gbrmpa DOT gov DOT au>
>   Reply to: leathm AT gbrmpa DOT gov DOT au
>   Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 01:24:02 GMT
>   Organization: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
>   Newsgroups:
>          comp.os.msdos.djgpp
>   Followup to: newsgroup(s)
>   References:
>          <Pine DOT NEB DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 961015133138 DOT 10709F-100000 AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
>
>Here is food for thought: Is it possible to implement threads of this
>sort into csdpmi? If we could, then we would be able to run seperate
>programs, spawn them, have forks and semaphores, etc. csdpmi would be
>able to control the ldt's and what not for true multi-tasking. Mind
>you, we would be better off with this using the ELF format (geez, I
>hope I don't start this up again... :)
>
>What do you think? possible? (A lot of work in the smallest case... ;)
>
>Leathal.

Well, the package would need to be re-written so that it would also
swap the transfer buffer in and out with each task.  Libc would need
to be re-written to make it re-entrant, and cwsdpmi would need to
be modified. If I was going to modify cwsdpmi, I would change the 
whole way that the lwp package task switches (with interrupts rather 
than signals).  You might as well write your own OS for all of that
trouble. ;)  The package was ment for multi-threading, not multitasking.
I'm sorry that I got my terminology mixed up.  Btw, have you tried out
the package?  What do you think?

Josh
snarfy AT goodnet DOT com