Re: [patch] two small problems in ssl_engine_mutex.c

2003-03-31 Thread Jim Jagielski
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > One, win32 won't compile (nor any platform missing chown). In this > case we didn't need it and have a good macro to look at. +1. We also use chown in a few other places as well: ./modules/generators/mod_cgid.c:if (chown(sconf->sockname, unixd_config.use

Re: [patch] two small problems in ssl_engine_mutex.c

2003-03-30 Thread Brian Pane
+1 Brian On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 22:53, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > One, win32 won't compile (nor any platform missing chown). In this > case we didn't need it and have a good macro to look at. > > This raised another bug in the next line. We assumed because we > default to SYSV mutexes we sho

Re: [patch] two small problems in ssl_engine_mutex.c

2003-03-30 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
--On Monday, March 31, 2003 12:53 AM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One, win32 won't compile (nor any platform missing chown). In this case we didn't need it and have a good macro to look at. Yup. Bad. It'd never get executed on them, but how is the compiler to know?

[patch] two small problems in ssl_engine_mutex.c

2003-03-30 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
One, win32 won't compile (nor any platform missing chown). In this case we didn't need it and have a good macro to look at. This raised another bug in the next line. We assumed because we default to SYSV mutexes we should do that magic. I believe this is wrong, and we should be looking for that