Joe Orton wrote:
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 02:49:56PM -0800, Stas Bekman wrote:

Joe Orton wrote:

I actually can't convince myself that changing APR_HAS_LARGE_FILES to be
0 on APR HEAD when LFS support is *enabled* is the right thing to do; it
just doesn't make sense.

I think the right way to solve this is to make mod_perl's
has_large_files_conflict/strip_lfs functions a bit more smarter, I'll
follow up with a more concrete proposal tomorrow.

I doubt this has anything to do with has_large_files_conflict. It's only used to decide whether we can allow seek() with non-zero offset. The segfaulting happens much much earlier.


The primary reason for has_large_files_conflict/strip_lfs existing is to
prevent the problem now being seen on HEAD happening with 2.0.  Remove
the strip_lfs logic from mod_perl and try building against a 2.0.x
release and I'll bet you'll see exactly the same issue.

right, I forgot that we had that strip_lfs function, I thought it was something from apr. So looking forward for your proposal/patch for the improved strip_lfs, Joe!


__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/     mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to