> From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 21 September 2001 16:42
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ben Hyde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 9:12 AM
> > I also think it's a long standing mistake that the subpools aren't
> > unwound via the same cleanup stack as everything else but have their
> > one one off to the side; that's a royal pain when you want to allocate
> > a node into it's own subpool while doing things like the above.
>
> Agreed. Here are my thoughts.
>
> We introduce an apr_cleanup_t. This is a _single_ cleanup holder for
> mutiple, extendable types of cleanups (at this moment, pool cleanup and
> cleanup for exec.)
We tried to change that in SMS. You might want to take a look
at that (concept wise).
Sander
