* Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > André Malo wrote: > > * Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>somehow I doubt there will be any problems at all getting it approved, but > >>nobody acted as a champion thus far and asked for approval themselves > > > > > > In fact, I've thought it was by intention, because of the APR 1.0 atomic > > calls ;-) > > shouldn't be any serious problems to work with APR 0.9... > > s/apr_atomic_inc32/apr_atomic_inc/ > s/apr_uint32_t next_id/apr_atomic_t next_id/ > > YMMVslightly
Yes, slightly ;-) apr_atomic_inc32 and apr_atomic_inc are not compatible, most notable the interface of the latter is not thread safe. Additionally there's no Win32 section in apr/atomic in 0.9. -> there needs to be done some apr work before porting mod_log_forensic. [cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] nd
