No problem. How's this?
Brad
Brad Nicholes
Senior Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions
http://www.novell.com
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, September 17, 2003 1:18:49 PM >>>
If you will change the logic for multithreads (not to be confused with
your
If you will change the logic for multithreads (not to be confused with
your logic changes for winsock :-) from
#if (defined(NETWARE) || defined(WIN32))
to use
#ifdef MULTITHREAD
and decorate STATIC (e.g. RFC_USER_STATIC) to avoid possible name
clashes - I'd be very happy to accept this patch :
Sorry about the ugly .diff file. Forgot to add the -u when I did the
diff. I already caught the trashed stack variable and made the fix so
everything looks much better in the log (real info instead of trash). I
also believe that Apache is smart enough not to make the call on a
keep-alive. In
At 01:09 PM 9/17/2003, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>Ah yeah, I noticed the problem with the JMP_BUF but for some reason I
>missed the local statics. I am assuming that these local variables are
>static simply to accomodate the setjmp() call. If I get rid of setjmp()
>and simply set the recv/send timeout
Ah yeah, I noticed the problem with the JMP_BUF but for some reason I
missed the local statics. I am assuming that these local variables are
static simply to accomodate the setjmp() call. If I get rid of setjmp()
and simply set the recv/send timeouts on the socket itself, there
shouldn't be any r
At 04:54 PM 9/16/2003, Brad Nicholes wrote:
> Looking through the code I don't see anything that would be a thread-safety issue.
> What am I missing?
/* rfc1413 - return remote user name, given socket structures */
API_EXPORT(char *) ap_rfc1413(conn_rec *conn, server_rec *srv)
{
static cha
Looking through the code I don't see anything that would be a thread-safety issue.
What am I missing?
Brad
Brad Nicholes
Senior Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions
http://www.novell.com
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, September 16, 2003 2:38:16 PM >
> Didn't you just introduce thread-safety issues?
> IIRC ident wasn't thread safe.
oops, sorry about that, but I wasnt aware of this.
So what would you suggest? perhaps backport the rfc1413.c from the 2.0 sources??
thanks, Guenter.
Didn't you just introduce thread-safety issues?
IIRC ident wasn't thread safe.
Bill
At 03:28 PM 9/16/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>bnicholes2003/09/16 13:28:12
>
> Modified:src/main rfc1413.c
> Log:
> Enable rfc1413 ident functionality on NetWare. Win32 may also need to
> include
