You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by Brad Nicholes <BN...@novell.com> on 2003/03/03 19:45:43 UTC

Problem with other_child changes...

The #if APR_HAS_OTHER_CHILD was removed from around the declaration of
the apr_proc_other_child_xxx() procedures in apr_thread_proc.h.  Yet the
function apr_proc_other_child_refresh() uses the structure
apr_other_child_rec_t which has been #if'ed out using
APR_HAS_OTHER_CHILD.  This causes a compiler error on platforms that do
not implement OTHER_CHILD.  We need to either put the #if back around
the function declarations or define apr_other_child_rec_t for all
platforms that don't implement OTHER_CHILD.

 

Brad Nicholes
Senior Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net business solutions
http://www.novell.com

Re: Problem with other_child changes...

Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.

At 12:45 PM 3/3/2003, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>The #if APR_HAS_OTHER_CHILD was removed from around the declaration of
>the apr_proc_other_child_xxx() procedures in apr_thread_proc.h.  Yet the
>function apr_proc_other_child_refresh() uses the structure
>apr_other_child_rec_t which has been #if'ed out using
>APR_HAS_OTHER_CHILD.  This causes a compiler error on platforms that do
>not implement OTHER_CHILD.  We need to either put the #if back around
>the function declarations or define apr_other_child_rec_t for all
>platforms that don't implement OTHER_CHILD.

No, we should expose apr_other_child_rec_t always, at least its typedef,
see my other post.

I'll make it so.

Bill