In my case I'm only interested in SLES11, where it seems to exhibit the
behavior I'm looking for.. I'm just trying to make sure building the apr
runtime to use flock doesn't have some negative/unforeseen impact on the
modules I'm using. It sounds like Apache itself doesn't use apr_file_lock from
Hi all,
Am 04.04.2013 13:44, schrieb Jeff Trawick:
For a more complete list, please refer to the following URLs:
http://apr.apache.org/docs/apr/modules.html
http://apr.apache.org/docs/apr-util/modules.html
These links are redirected to the APR 0.9 docs:
http://apr.apache.org/docs/apr/0.9
The Apache Software Foundation and the Apache Portable Runtime
Project are proud to announce the General Availability of version
1.5.2 of the APR Apache Portable Runtime Utility library.
APR-util 1.5.2 provides a number of bug fixes.
(See CHANGES-APR-UTIL-1.5 for more information.)
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> Tarballs/zipfiles are at http://apr.apache.org/dev/dist/
>>
>> Shortcuts to CHANGES:
>>
>> http://apr.apache.org/dev/dist/CHANGES-APR-UTIL-1.5.2
>> http://apr.apache.org/dev/dist/CHANG
On 3 April 2013 21:03, Greg Lazar wrote:
> **
> The apr_file_lock routine, in the version of apr runtime library that I've
> currently built uses fnctl which does not appear to be thread safe. I need
> to use the worker MPM, so is it recommended that I build the apr runtime
> library to use flock
