On Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 01:53:21PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:> On Tue, 17 Aug 1999, Carlos Costa Portela wrote:> > > Hello all!> > > > This morning I went to a work-interview. Unfortunately, in that company> > they use WinNT. But, well, they had a good opinion about linux, blah,> > blah, blah...> > > > But the director says me that linux doesn't implement threads, is this> > true?. He said that threads in linux are implemented by a library, not at> > kernel-level.> > > > If you can give me more info, please let me know.> > 	From my understanding, most of the threading work is implemented in> either glibc2 or linux-threads, w/ some kernel-level hooks (clone() I think?).No, Linux 2.x implements threads entirely in the kernel. The userspacelibrary merely provides a POSIX API to the kernel interface (clone).> 	Now, from my experiance linux handles threads pretty nicely, and from> what I've seen according to POSIX semantics to boot.  Linux, and unix, already> handles multiple processes at a time, so the idea is, what's a thread but> another process? (I know I'm going to get flamed for this by SOMEONE), so> that's the way Linux handles it.  Two threads in a running program are just> simply two processes that share some info, similar to fork'ed processes, but> not quite. ;)>> 	Anyhow, that's how I understand it, and I've yet to run into any> problems or drawbacks in the linux thread implementation compared to other> OS's (Solaris being one, NT another) that have threads at 'kernel-level'.Linux's implementation is by far the most elegant.-- Nathan Hand - Chirp Web Design - http://www.chirp.com.au/ - $e^{i\pi}+1 = 0$Phone: +61 2 6230 1871   Fax: +61 2 6230 1515   E-mail: nathanh@chirp.com.au-To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" inthe body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.eduPlease read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/