On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 12:45:43PM -0500, Greg Hudson wrote: > (Please keep me cc'd on replies, incidentally.) > > Joe Orton wrote: > > I think the best way to achieve this is to define apr_off_t as > > off64_t on such platforms, rather than unconditionally change > > apr_off_t everywhere, and add LFS support to APR: most of this work > > is already done inside #ifdef NETWARE anyway. > > Won't that create an ABI time bomb for platforms which have no > large-file support now, but acquire it in the future?
That's asking for a level of ABI guarantee which I don't think APR can provide regardless of this apr_off_t issue. Will a libapr-0.so built on RHL9 have a compatible ABI with a libapr-0.so built on RHL6.2? What if the libpthread soname changed between OS versions? (bearing in mind that both applications using APR and libapr itself are-or-should-be linked against libpthread) joe
