At 05:43 PM 4/14/2008, Graham Leggett wrote:
If you revert this, you break mod_session_crypto, which in turn
severely limits the usefulness of mod_session_cookie, which in turns
limits the usefulness of mod_auth_form, which is turn limits the
usefulness of httpd's powerful AAA mechanism that
At 05:44 PM 9/15/2006, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
It seems, then, that this will become one of two different solutions,
with your DllMain alternative implementation that will need to be
compiled
if we discover we are building to a dynamic library for non-x86
targets :(
Perhaps VC8 actually
At 12:59 PM 9/15/2006, Mladen Turk wrote:
Greg Marr wrote:
At 12:06 PM 9/15/2006, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Quick observation, but MSVCRTD.lib in combination with VS 2005?
Yes, the lib file does not have the version number in the filename.
???
What are you talking about?
The DLL for VS
At 02:00 PM 9/15/2006, Mladen Turk wrote:
Greg Marr wrote:
At 12:59 PM 9/15/2006, Mladen Turk wrote:
Greg Marr wrote:
At 12:06 PM 9/15/2006, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Quick observation, but MSVCRTD.lib in combination with VS 2005?
Yes, the lib file does not have the version number
At 04:30 AM 7/12/2006, Joe Orton wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 12:20:03PM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 7/10/06, Tyler MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any reason why the z modifier is not included here?
It seems like
that is what printf(3) says we want to use for formatting
At 05:32 AM 5/3/2006, Joe Orton wrote:
+me-cnt_max = max_threads;
+me-idle_max = init_threads;
+rv = apr_thread_mutex_create(me-lock,
APR_THREAD_MUTEX_NESTED,
+ me-pool);
+if (APR_SUCCESS != rv) {
Personally I find the constant != variable
At 10:00 AM 5/3/2006, Joe Orton wrote:
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 09:41:14AM -0400, Greg Marr wrote:
At 05:32 AM 5/3/2006, Joe Orton wrote:
+me-cnt_max = max_threads;
+me-idle_max = init_threads;
+rv = apr_thread_mutex_create(me-lock,
APR_THREAD_MUTEX_NESTED
At 12:55 PM 5/3/2006, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Greg Marr wrote:
I mostly work on Windows, and VC++ only recently added a warning
for that. I've been using this style for so long that it doesn't
sacrifice readability, and in fact, the var == const form looks
wrong now.
However
At 02:54 PM 2/14/2006, Ian Holsman wrote:
Mads Toftum wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 09:57:50AM -0800, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On the other hand though, I think it's totally pointless to go build
another memcached implementation as part of APR-Util just for
testing
purposes. That time would be
At 12:08 PM 8/16/2005, Garrett Rooney wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
At 09:24 PM 8/15/2005, Garrett Rooney wrote:
So back in Dec 2003 Sander Striker suggested [1] adding
Subversion's macros for manipulating apr arrays (APR_ARRAY_IDX,
which automates the casting needed to access entries
At 09:53 PM 5/11/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The beta VC++ 2005 Express includes everything one would want,
nmake, cl, lib, link et al. It does not have msvcr70.lib in it's
lib/ tree. It does have msvcrt.lib. In SDK\v2.0\Bin one also finds
msvcr80.dll.
Which means, it appears, that
At 11:23 AM 3/18/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I absolutely refuse to punish users who are using good OSes because
some OSes are brain-dead. This is exactly the role that APR is
meant to fill
Feel free to advocate Linux always returning APR_ENOTIMPL for
sendfile - I don't care. However,
At 04:03 PM 3/17/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
Tuesday: Tagged, and sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thursday Night: Took my count of the votes, latter pushed the files
to the mirrors.
Friday Morning: Sent out the announcements.
Paul, I think your calendar is a day off, it's only Thursday.
At 01:06 PM 10/1/2004, Jean-Jacques Clar wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/28/04 5:10 PM
#ifdef DWORD_MAX
#define APR_DWORD_MAX DWORD_MAX
#else
#define DWORD_MAX 4294967295UL
#endif
What about:
#ifndef DWORD_MAX
#define DWORD_MAX 4294967295UL/* 2^32*/
#endif
#define
At 06:50 PM 9/28/2004, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 28 Sep 2004 16:16:17 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-#define DWORD_MAX 4294967295
+#define APR_DWORD_MAX 4294967295
or
#define APR_DWORD_MAX (DWORD_MAX)
since this is a platform which defines it?
Well, in VC++ 7.1,
At 07:20 AM 9/23/2004, Mladen Turk wrote:
Is there any reason why apr, apr-util, httpd mailing lists have
Reply-To header set to the sender and not to the list itself. I
think almost all other lists has the 'Replay-To' header set to the
list itself. I mean, I'm receiving the messages from the
that APR hasn't covered yet, it can at least provide the
mechanisms for determining the platform in a predictable fashion.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:26:43 -0800
Dave Viner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to compile a pretty simple C++ library using STL and APR.
However, just including the header files, I get this compilation
error:
..\..\..\..\..\..\apr\apr\include\apr_allocator.h(103) : error C2955:
'allocator' :
LPTSTR lpBuffer); // path buffer
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is specified. This should probably be explicit in
the docs.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
#if SOME_CONDITION
#pragma comment(lib, libname.lib)
#endif
inside a source file in the project instead of putting the lib in the
.dsp. I'm not 100% sure that this would work in this particular case.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan
2^20.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
At 10:27 AM 07/11/2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Greg Marr wrote:
I keep thinking that APR_USEC_PER_SEC should be (1 20), or now
(1 APR_USEC_BITS) instead of the magical constant. I have no
way
of verifying with a quick glance that 1048576 is really 2^20.
It is :)
Well, yes, I did check
APR_TIME_C(2 ^ APR_BUSEC_BITS)
Thanks, but (2 ^ APR_BUSEC_BITS) is 22 (^ is XOR). You want 1
APR_BUSEC_BITS.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
.
Shoot. [Bang.]
Can everyone playing make this fix themselves for a little bit?
I have one patch to write for the guts of NT (which plays in 100ns
time
units) to mirror the new patch. I'll post both together a bit later.
Bill
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I
) *
APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
+
+#define APR_TIME_MAKE(sec, usec) ((apr_time_t)(sec) *
APR_USEC_PER_SEC + usec)
Aren't these all missing a set of parens? In other words, I think the
cast should occur after the division/multiplication.
Also, the last one doesn't have parens around usec.
--
Greg Marr
, it doesn't exist, or just can't be found.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
++, (and so is new, by the way).
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
At 02:15 PM 02/19/2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
ULONG_PTR? Not defined anywhere on my system (greped all the Visual
Studio directories).
It's in the platform SDK. It's part of the support for porting to
64-bit Windows, which didn't start appearing until after VC6 was
released.
--
Greg Marr
recommended above.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
be worthwhile to do this with
files in the
docs as I a working with them?
The reason it does that is that XML is case-sensitive for tag names,
and the HTML working group chose to use lowercase for XHTML. Thus,
if the pages were ever to be marked as XHTML, they'd need to be
lowercase.
--
Greg
On Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:18:47 +0200
Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rbb 01/09/01 00:29:07
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_thread_once(apr_thread_once_t
*control,
void (*func)(void))
{
+/* Quick escape hatch, and bug
is -0500.
How is the calculation wrong? It should be 5, it is 5, I don't see
the problem.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
to the usage of the value, I was referring to the
calculation itself. Brian said it was independent of DST, and
produced 5 for US/Eastern. Roy said the calculation must be wrong
since EDT is -0400, which makes no sense.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better
Win32 API function. The allocator uses
HeapAlloc and VirtualAlloc to get its own blocks. These use a
private heap created for the CRT. According to the help, these
functions are serialized to prevent access by multiple threads to the
same heap.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were
is not 100% solved. We need to make ourselves a
new
MMAP to the file that we know won't get deleted.
Why not simply reference count the MMAP/file handle?
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
At 12:53 PM 06/26/2001, Greg Marr wrote:
At 12:05 PM 06/26/2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
Anyway, the problem is not 100% solved. We need to make ourselves
a new
MMAP to the file that we know won't get deleted.
Why not simply reference count the MMAP/file handle?
I came up with these questions after
On Sun, 27 May 2001 00:12:33 -0700
Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really... void* should be automatically castable to anything.
In C++, void * isn't automatically castable to anything at all.
At 10:35 AM 05/24/2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
From: Greg Marr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 7:59 AM
That's actually what I was expecting to find. I was quite
surprised
to find it in C. That was from MSVC by the way.
What are you talking about :-? See
DevStudio\VC\crt
to be handled.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
the filename
and line number of each allocation, and when exiting, report the ones
that were never freed. I'm not sure if this would be at all useful
in APR, though. Do any of the memory systems require explicit calls
to free, or is everything done through cleanups now?
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL
include the braces.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
for someone not
familiar with apr_bucket_do_create()'s innards.
I agree. Having macros that look like functions, but have return
statements in them, is bad. It also prevents those macros from being
made into inline functions without changing all the places that call
them.
--
Greg Marr
a
zero.
I agree that this would be a good change.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
(b, buffer, APR_BUCKET_BUFF_SIZE * 2 + 1);
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
optimization that I noticed would probably be useful would
be to have apr_brigade_putstrs written at the same level as
apr_brigade_write such that you save the memcpy of apr_brigade_write
after the apr_vsnprintf.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now
, is that apr_vsnprintf
doesn't have
anything to do with apr_brigade_putstrs and apr_brigade_write, so I
don't
see the connection.
Sorry, apr_brigade_vprintf, not apr_brigade_putstrs.
--
Greg Marr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We thought you were dead.
I was, but I'm better now. - Sheridan, The Summoning
47 matches
Mail list logo
