On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:40 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > apr-trunk (r1790379): > % ./testall -v testprocmutex > testprocmutex : -Line 189: Locks don't appear to work with timedlock > -flock_timedlock() not implemented,/Line 189: Locks don't appear to work > with timedlock > -Line 189: Locks don't appear to work with timedlock > -fcntl_timedlock() not implemented,-Line 133: create the mutex > /default_timed_timedlock() not implemented,-Line 172: Default timed > timedlock not implemented > FAILED 4 of 6 > Failed Tests Total Fail Failed % > =================================================== > testprocmutex 6 4 66.67% > > apr-1.6 (r1790305): > % ./testall -v testprocmutex > testprocmutex : -flock_timedlock() not implemented,-Line 194: Locks > don't appear to work with timedlock > -fcntl_timedlock() not implemented,FAILED 1 of 6 > Failed Tests Total Fail Failed % > =================================================== > testprocmutex 6 1 16.67% > > we seem to be going backwards (apr-trunk includes the fallback) > since now we lost default_timed_timedlock()
I tried to not modify the other (non PROC_PTHREAD) mechanisms normally. Could it be, e.g., r1790303 (which is not in 1.6.x either)? Anyway, I just commited another fallback (r1790436), could you please test this version on OSX? If pshared mutex+cond still do not work as expected on OSX, maybe we could un-configure it (i.e. ac_have_pthread_condattr_setpshared="no") and let it fall through the new generic fallback...
