On 12/2/2011 6:10 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 12/2/2011 6:08 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 12/2/2011 5:48 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
Hi,
where are we WRT 2.4?
Blockers:
mod_proxy_scgi.c needs to be fixed for compilation with C89 (easy)
The only blocker left in STATUS is this:
* Modules that are not ready for production use must be removed.
The same for modules without documentation.
I think we have already removed the obvious candidates WRT maturity.
About documentation, docs/STATUS has this:
- modules docs
- the follwing modules added since 2.2 lack documentation
- mod_watchdog
- mod_heartbeat
- mod_heartmonitor
- mod_lbmethod_heartbeat
- mod_socache_dbm
- mod_socache_memcache
- mod_socache_shmcb
Do we want to remove any of these modules?
I suspect a single doc for "mod_socache" would probably be appropriate.
I was reading http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_slotmem_shm.html
and am rather fluxored that the authors apparently don't know the definition
of the word "anonymous" shared memory. And there is a brand new syntax if
users want log-root-relative paths?
Why would slotmem throw away 15 years of filename argument conventions?
On the subject of logs-relative vs absolute, "/" should prevail, the
colon prefix is unacceptable.
On the subject of anonymous, "Anonymous mappings are mappings of that area of the
process's virtual memory backed by the swap space instead of by a file in the file system
name space. In this respect an anonymous mapping is similar to malloc, and is used in some
malloc implementations for certain allocations. However, anonymous mappings are not part
of the POSIX standard, though implemented by almost all systems."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mmap
It's pretty obvious why that shm "anonymous" implementation is laughable,
as well as unacceptable. But in fact, the <none> implementation appearsto
suggest anonymous, already.
