Mladen Turk wrote: > > Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I know that Bill is looking at a release of APR and > > that alternate method would, I think, be better > > implemented in APR than directly in httpd... > > > > Sure it can be done, but in that case it would require at > least a minor version bump. > I have a proto that uses > APR_SO_DISCONNECTED inside the apr_socket_opt_get. > It's used on win32 only, an only for sendfile. > Anyhow, I have a proposal that will solve that even. > > Even if we port the APR_SO_DISCONNECTED to APR 1.2.8, > we would need to depend on that APR version, because > previous versions would behave in a different way. > > Think that portback of is_socket_connected would > impose less problems. >
Except that it has not be as widely tested as I think we would like... Does it work with ANY system that defines LINUX, for example? Regardless of kernel level? We do have a "better" implementation of the old is_socket_connected() than in 2.2.3 in 2.2.4... Maybe a compile time flag? I'd like some easy way for someone to disable it if need be... For APR, I was simply thinking of apr_is_socket_connected() and yeah, 2.2.4 would require that version of APR... -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
