Re: apr_table_compress

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoffrey Young wrote: [...] modperl_apache_compat.c does exactly that. make sure to mark when it was added so when we bump up the minimal required version we can remove the old workarounds. ap_table_compress first appears in 2.0.47. both 2.0.46 and 2.0.47 claim to have APR 0.9.4, so I guess w

Re: apr_table_compress

2003-08-18 Thread Geoffrey Young
ignored how? 2.0.38 compiles cleanly but then throws a runtime error when I try and use the function (which I guess that is how it always works when you call an undefined C function) Hmm, right, I think WrapXS picks things from the Function.pm and not actually checking the C-source. In that

Re: apr_table_compress

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoffrey Young wrote: Stas Bekman wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: hi I've implemented apr_table_compress, which was recently added to the APR table API. the only thing I'm unsure about is what our position is on APR changes - can we rely on the autogeneration code for this (and perhaps ot

Re: apr_table_compress

2003-08-18 Thread Geoffrey Young
Stas Bekman wrote: Geoffrey Young wrote: hi I've implemented apr_table_compress, which was recently added to the APR table API. the only thing I'm unsure about is what our position is on APR changes - can we rely on the autogeneration code for this (and perhaps other recent additions),

Re: apr_table_compress

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoffrey Young wrote: hi I've implemented apr_table_compress, which was recently added to the APR table API. the only thing I'm unsure about is what our position is on APR changes - can we rely on the autogeneration code for this (and perhaps other recent additions), breaking back compat,

apr_table_compress

2003-08-18 Thread Geoffrey Young
hi I've implemented apr_table_compress, which was recently added to the APR table API. the only thing I'm unsure about is what our position is on APR changes - can we rely on the autogeneration code for this (and perhaps other recent additions), breaking back compat, or do we need some kin

Re: [PATCH mp1.28] Clean up file uploaded by test suite

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Steve Hay wrote: Stas Bekman wrote: Steve Hay wrote: Hi, After running the test suite with mp1.28 on Windows I find that I have a temporary file left behind in my temp dir (in my case, C:\Temp). This happens because the filehandle is left open. The attached patch closes it, and the file gets

Re: [PATCH mp1.28] Clean up file uploaded by test suite

2003-08-18 Thread Steve Hay
Stas Bekman wrote: Steve Hay wrote: Hi, After running the test suite with mp1.28 on Windows I find that I have a temporary file left behind in my temp dir (in my case, C:\Temp). This happens because the filehandle is left open. The attached patch closes it, and the file gets deleted automati

Re: [PATCH mp1.28] Clean up file uploaded by test suite

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Steve Hay wrote: Hi, After running the test suite with mp1.28 on Windows I find that I have a temporary file left behind in my temp dir (in my case, C:\Temp). This happens because the filehandle is left open. The attached patch closes it, and the file gets deleted automatically later. I suppos

[PATCH mp1.28] Clean up file uploaded by test suite

2003-08-18 Thread Steve Hay
Hi, After running the test suite with mp1.28 on Windows I find that I have a temporary file left behind in my temp dir (in my case, C:\Temp). This happens because the filehandle is left open. The attached patch closes it, and the file gets deleted automatically later. - Steve diff -ruN mod_pe

APR/AP => MP sync

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoff, So as discussed earlier we need to verify which methods have changed. I think Doug has some tools to do that in util/build. However it could be easier to look up all the deprecated functions, which will also tell their replacements. I've already coded some of the changes but they weren't

Re: [mp2] VOID on WIN32

2003-08-18 Thread Stas Bekman
Geoffrey Young wrote: A s/VOID/MP_VOID/ gets around this, but perhaps there's a more intuitive name? bah - I _knew_ that would be a problem for somebody... And it's usually Win32 :) :) I'd suggest renaming them all to MP_ or MP_HOOK_. How about the following? looks good. however, after