[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> ianh02/02/12 13:49:15
>
> Added: atomic/unix apr_atomic.c
>include apr_atomic.h
try building it with --disable-shared... I dare ya :)
--
Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wrowe 02/02/11 16:07:34
Modified:file_io/win32 open.c
Log:
I don't trust that the OS is even returning an error - if the handle
is an invalid handle - I'm not certain that's an error. Certainly
this code is safer - merits pushing into .32
Revision
>From out in left field... this was sitting amidst my drafts. Dunno how
relevant it still is.
From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 10:30 AM
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 12:07:58AM +1000, Brian Havard wrote:
> >
> > On OS/2 the only native mechanism that has cr
"jean-frederic clere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sander Striker wrote:
>>
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Behalf Of jean-frederic clere
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a question:
>>>
>>> mod_webapp from Tomcat uses APR:
>>>
>>> Where should APR be downloaded from? - It
Hello
This patch makes apr_file_attrs_set respect the current umask, rather
than unconditionally setting permissions. It's much like my previous
patch, but updated to reflect recent changes in apr_file_attrs_set.
Philip
Index: file_io/unix/filestat.c
Sander Striker wrote:
>
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Behalf Of jean-frederic clere
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a question:
> >
> > mod_webapp from Tomcat uses APR:
> >
> > Where should APR be downloaded from? - It must be a tarball because that is
> > for
> > the ones t
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of jean-frederic clere
> Hi,
>
> I have a question:
>
> mod_webapp from Tomcat uses APR:
>
> Where should APR be downloaded from? - It must be a tarball because that is
> for
> the ones that want to build mod_webapp on their own -
>
Hi,
I have a question:
mod_webapp from Tomcat uses APR:
Where should APR be downloaded from? - It must be a tarball because that is for
the ones that want to build mod_webapp on their own -
Until now I was adding apr to a subdirectory of mod_webapp and releasing the
corresponding tarball. (Norma
> -Original Message-
> From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 3:31 AM
> To: dev@apr.apache.org
> Subject: Re: APR WCE take 3
>
> From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:24 PM
>
> > Going back to
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:52:35AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> wrowe 02/02/11 17:52:35
>
> Modified:strings apr_strnatcmp.c
> Log:
> WinCE port from Mladen Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I think this question deserves an answer - is this assert legit
No. It
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:24 PM
> Finally, I don't have a ton of time, and I'd love to see these finished this
> month. Others understand Win32 sockets API as well if not better than I, so
> I'm attaching the network aspects of your patch
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:24 PM
> Going back to take two...
>
> I'm reviewing and committing so changes to occur fairly shortly don't create
> extra hassles later applying these patches.
>
> Some are trivial, some are very close to rights
Going back to take two...
I'm reviewing and committing so changes to occur fairly shortly don't create
extra hassles later applying these patches.
Some are trivial, some are very close to rights. I'm committing those tonight.
Some need more review. I'm uncomfortable with one aspect or another
++1, would you care to make it so :-?
- Original Message -
From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: cvs commit: apr/file_io/unix mktemp.c
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:34:14PM -0600,
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:34:14PM -0600, William Rowe wrote:
> A question for the list - are we really working in microsecond resolutions?
> (Win32 is to the nearest 10 microseconds, I'm guessing others aren't that
> precise.) If so, what would you choose as a divisor, since we could certainly
>
I'm near certain we want to fall over gracefully here, correct???
> wrowe 02/02/11 17:32:55
>
> Modified:file_io/win32 open.c
> Log:
> stdfoo handles are unsupported on WinCE. Submitted by Mladen Turk
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
> I believe the patch for CE is wrong is
A question for the list - are we really working in microsecond resolutions?
(Win32 is to the nearest 10 microseconds, I'm guessing others aren't that
precise.) If so, what would you choose as a divisor, since we could certainly
pick a better divisor than USEC_PER_SEC for randomness.
> wrowe
17 matches
Mail list logo