APACHE PORTABLE RUNTIME UTILITIES (APR-util) LIBRARY STATUS:-*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2007-02-16 21:50:17 -0500 (Fri, 16 Feb 2007) $]
Releases:
1.3.0 : in development
1.2.9 : in development
1.2.8 : released December 4, 2006
1.2.7 : released April 14, 2
APACHE PORTABLE RUNTIME (APR) LIBRARY STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2007-01-24 09:30:55 -0500 (Wed, 24 Jan 2007) $]
Releases:
1.3.0 : in development
1.2.9 : in development
1.2.8 : released December 4, 2006
1.2.7 : released April 14, 2
I'm trying to compile the apr, apr-util and apr-iconv projects on my Fedora
box, latest versions downloaded today. I am able to successfully configure,
make, make install both apr & apr-util. Then I can sucessfully configure
apr-iconv but when I try to make it I get the following error:
Fedora
On Wed, March 28, 2007 6:15 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We need to add an error code for "there was an openssl error"
> to allow us to direct the user to call a function to determine
> what was wrong.
>
> Highlighted by Joe Orton
By way of example, the apr_ldap code tries to solve this problem
David Reid wrote:
>
>> - lots of argument validation (APR_EINVAL returns) which is non-standard
>> for APR
>
> I don't see why this is a huge issue.
Slows things down. Input validation is the caller's responsibility.
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:40:30AM +0100, David Reid wrote:
>> A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
>> be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
>> information as to why, but that's OK.
>
> Are you saying it *is* in a stat
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 10:09:43AM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
>>> Given Joe's stance (which I'm taking as a veto) I think removing it and
>>> starting a seperate "module" within apr's repo would make the most sense
>>> and should remove the veto from 1.3 - making everyone happy.
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 10:09:43AM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
>>> Given Joe's stance (which I'm taking as a veto) I think removing it and
>>> starting a seperate "module" within apr's repo would make the most sense
>>> and should remove the veto from 1.3 - making everyone happy.
Hi,
is it possibile to write a server program using APR (of course) and the
apache MPMs module
to manage connections? it is part of APR?
If is it possibile to use it, in which way? Are there some examples?
Thanks in advance,
Carlo
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 10:09:43AM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
> > Given Joe's stance (which I'm taking as a veto) I think removing it and
> > starting a seperate "module" within apr's repo would make the most sense
> > and should remove the veto from 1.3 - making everyone happy.
>
> I definately d
David Reid wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>> Does SSL block any other change in 1.3?
>
> Not as far as I'm aware.
One I can think of - the threadpool API, but I'm willing to wait for
a richer feature set before calling 1.3 baked.
I'm pretty sure httpd would like to pick up 1.3.x by the
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> David Reid wrote:
>> A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
>> be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
>> information as to why, but that's OK.
>
> Actually, I don't know that it is OK.
>
> 1.2.9 on the current
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:40:30AM +0100, David Reid wrote:
>> A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
>> be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
>> information as to why, but that's OK.
>
> Are you saying it *is* in a stat
David Reid wrote:
> A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
> be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
> information as to why, but that's OK.
Actually, I don't know that it is OK.
1.2.9 on the current-stable branch should be released shortly
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:40:30AM +0100, David Reid wrote:
> A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
> be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
> information as to why, but that's OK.
Are you saying it *is* in a state ready for a 1.3 release,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:40:30AM +0100, David Reid wrote:
> A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
> be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
> information as to why, but that's OK.
>
It would be nice to get the reason for that. Having SSL
A while back there was a comment on this list that the ssl code should
be "ripped out" before the next release. There was no additional
information as to why, but that's OK.
Maybe it should be removed into a seperate module along the same lines
as apr-iconv? Additionally we should look at what rea
Hi,
I've been building apr on mingw for quiet some time now. However, I was
recently contacted by someone else that wanted to do this, and was able
to help them out, and also learn more about building on that platform.
That person (Fathi) made a wiki on the log4cxx website describing how to
build
18 matches
Mail list logo
