> > * srclib/apr/file_io/unix/dir.c: changed a suspicious #ifdef
> > statement. Is this a missconfiguration of thread vs. non-thread #ifdef
> > exclusion?!?!
>
> I am leaving the question of this patch to the more gifted. I see where
> you are coming from, but I read the original (and patch) three times, and
> came to three different conclusions. Someone want to determine before we
> tag and roll?
>
>
> --- httpd-2_0_22/srclib/apr/file_io/unix/dir.c Fri Jun 15 20:04:43 2001
> +++ httpd-2_0_22-cygwin/srclib/apr/file_io/unix/dir.c Thu Aug 9 10:00:09
> 2001 @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@
> {
> apr_status_t ret = 0;
> #if APR_HAS_THREADS && defined(_POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS) \
> - && !defined(READDIR_IS_THREAD_SAFE)
> + && defined(READDIR_IS_THREAD_SAFE)
> struct dirent *retent;
>
> ret = readdir_r(thedir->dirstruct, thedir->entry, &retent);
The code is correct as it is today. Basically, it is possible for platforms to have
defined _POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS, and a thread-safe readdir.
If both of those conditions are true, then we want to use readdir, not readdir_r.
This if statement handle that condition.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------
