On Wednesday 19 September 2001 07:40 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Calling the AcceptMutex proc_pthread is just silly. 1.3 got it
> right by calling it pthread.
>
> This would also be one less thing for a person who uses this new
> feature in 1.3 to change when they upgrade to 2.0.
>
> Would anyone raise a fit if I committed this? -- justin
Why is calling it proc_pthread silly? We are talking about a pthread based
process lock. Personally, I think Apache 1.3 should be changed, especially
since it hasn't been released yet. My concern is that calling it a pthread lock
makes it sound like we are just locking threads.
Ryan
> Index: server/mpm_common.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/server/mpm_common.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.67
> diff -u -r1.67 mpm_common.c
> --- server/mpm_common.c 2001/09/18 22:13:57 1.67
> +++ server/mpm_common.c 2001/09/20 02:29:39
> @@ -604,7 +604,7 @@
> }
> #endif
> #if APR_HAS_PROC_PTHREAD_SERIALIZE
> - else if (!strcasecmp(arg, "proc_pthread")) {
> + else if (!strcasecmp(arg, "pthread")) {
> ap_accept_lock_mech = APR_LOCK_PROC_PTHREAD;
> }
> #endif
> @@ -621,7 +621,7 @@
> ", sysvsem"
> #endif
> #if APR_HAS_PROC_PTHREAD_SERIALIZE
> - ", proc_pthread"
> + ", pthread"
> #endif
> , NULL);
> }
--
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------
