Sander Striker wrote:
>On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 22:03, Stas Bekman wrote:
>
>
>>I couldn't find apr_realloc() in the apr API. Is that on purpose or just
>>wasn't needed so far?
>>
>>I suppose realloc is hard in the pool architecture, since if you have
>>allocated something after the alloc, you ha
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 06:32, Joe Orton wrote:
> Not sure what you mean by "APR code"... it would happen if the C++
> library exposes apr_off_t in its own API:
Yes, you're right; Ben corrected me on this over IRC. Sorry to confuse
the issue.
(What I was talking about was taking some or all of the
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 08:44:07AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> APR_INT32_T_FMT isn't showing up in apr.h for me, leading to compile
> failure for references to APR_OFF_T_FMT
Sorry, fixed now.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jorton 2004/01/29 00:33:41
Modified:.Tag: APR_0_9_BRANCH configure.in CHANGES
Log:
* configure.in: Define apr_off_t as an apr_intX_t type rather than
off_t to prevent the size of apr_off_t being affected by the
_FILE_OFFSET_BITS definition on LFS
Title: AntiChrist Revealed
SATURDAY
IS THE TRUE LORD'S DAY
Anti-Christ
Revealed!
SUNDAY will be enforced by law.
THE MARK OF THE BEAST!
666
Revelation 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save
Ben's fixed-size-apr_off_t patch is now checked in for the next 0.9.x
release, many thanks to all involved.
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 06:37:10PM -0500, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 17:34, Joe Orton wrote:
> > One possible minor issue with this patch:
> >
> > if a C++ library based on
APRUTIL LIBRARY STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2003/03/31 05:32:43 $]
Release:
0.9.3 : Tagged March 30, 2002
0.9.2 : Released March 22, 2002 (alpha)
0.9.1 : Released September 11, 2002 (alpha)
0.9.0 : Not released
APACHE PORTABLE RUNTIME (APR) LIBRARY STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2003/11/21 10:42:03 $]
Release:
0.9.3 : tagged March 30, 2003
0.9.2 : released March 22, 2003
0.9.1 : released September 11, 2002
0.9.0 : released August 28, 2002
2.0a9
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 10:34:41PM +, Joe Orton wrote:
> One possible minor issue with this patch:
>
> if a C++ library based on APR uses apr_off_t in its API, I believe that
> changing apr_off_t from a long to an int changes the ABI of that
> library, because of the name mangling stuff.
>
>
