You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 2014/01/25 18:47:49 UTC
permissions
Any reason why we've never pulled
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
into apr-1.5 ?
If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!
Re: permissions
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 12:47:49 -0500
Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> Any reason why we've never pulled
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
>
> into apr-1.5 ?
>
> If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
> I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
>
> FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!
It extends the ABI, therefore isn't suited to 1.5.x. We can't add
a new function entry point which would cause a program linked to 1.5.2
to fail to load under 1.5.0. The ABI's remain identical except for
actual damage/bug mitigation.
It doesn't break the ABI and appears to be forward-compatible, so it
looks suitable for trunk and also for 1.6.x.
Re: UDS in APR (Was: Re: permissions)
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> BTW: What about:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=745763
>
>
A major concern is that the layout/size of the apr_sockaddr_t in 1.x can't
change since it isn't an opaque type:
>From 745763:
@@ -245,6 +268,10 @@
* dependent on whether APR_HAVE_IPV6 is defined. */
struct sockaddr_storage sas;
#endif
+#if APR_HAVE_SOCKADDR_UN
+ /** Unix domain socket sockaddr structure */
+ struct sockaddr_un unx;
+#endif
} sa;
};
Also, I recall spending a bit (but not enough) time looking at
management of AF_UNIX socket addresses in the past, and it seemed like
APR could really help manage the storage (beyond simply struct
sockaddr_un) to allow the largest possible socket paths. (I think the
problem at the time was that socket paths had to be explicitly
configured out of /path/to/httpd/logs/mod_foo/XXX more often than
you'd like because of running out of space in sun_path before hitting
a filesystem limitation.) But that's more clearly a 2.0 issue.
> On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:33 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would be nice to have these in 1.6.x too.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yann.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> >> Any reason why we've never pulled
> >>
> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
> >>
> >> into apr-1.5 ?
> >>
> >> If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
> >> I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
> >>
> >> FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!
> >
>
>
--
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/
http://edjective.org/
UDS in APR (Was: Re: permissions)
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
BTW: What about:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=745763
On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:33 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would be nice to have these in 1.6.x too.
>
> Regards,
> Yann.
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>> Any reason why we've never pulled
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
>>
>> into apr-1.5 ?
>>
>> If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
>> I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
>>
>> FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!
>
Re: permissions
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
Thanks!
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> Added...
>
> On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:33 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would be nice to have these in 1.6.x too.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Yann.
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>>> Any reason why we've never pulled
>>>
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
>>>
>>> into apr-1.5 ?
>>>
>>> If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
>>> I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
>>>
>>> FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!
>>
>
Re: permissions
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Added...
On Apr 28, 2014, at 7:33 AM, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would be nice to have these in 1.6.x too.
>
> Regards,
> Yann.
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
>> Any reason why we've never pulled
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
>>
>> into apr-1.5 ?
>>
>> If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
>> I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
>>
>> FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!
>
Re: permissions
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
I would be nice to have these in 1.6.x too.
Regards,
Yann.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> Any reason why we've never pulled
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741869
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=741862
>
> into apr-1.5 ?
>
> If these look useful, and adding them doesn't break the ABI,
> I'm willing to do the work required to backport.
>
> FWIW: They are almost 5 years old!