Re: NSPR and 2.0

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

Dean Gaudet wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
> > Dean Gaudet wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I agree that NSPR seems to provide a lot of capability, but does it
> > > > provide more than we need. Porting it to a non-supported platform
> > > > is pretty non-trivial and involved.
> > > 
> > > Ah, so you've ported it and say this with experience right?
> > 
> >   ... Yes ...
> 
> Actually I guessed you were working on an AUX port.  I'm just peeved
> because this NSPR topic has been around for months and it's only now that
> people are raising various points that would have been better raised ages
> ago.  I'm also peeved because nobody has been doing any work with it...
> I'm totally happy to hear you're doing work.
> 

Maybe part of the reason why it's coming up now is that with 1.3.2
out, 2.0 becomes more of a reality. I've been fooling around with
it for a few months, but never bothered commiting anything because,
well, the required changes are so ugly :) A/UX doesn't have a mmap
or support DLL so there's lots of conflicts. In the unix.c file,
there's huge chunks of stuff that assumes mmap and requires
work, but I'm not even sure if the code affected is even used
by Apache 2.0. With Ralf bringing up the topic, I thought it
would be a good time to "chime in" and bring up some thoughts
I had. It's for this particular reason why I asked about "streamlining"
it and only having the files/functions needed. I'm totally clueless
about which "parts" of NSPR are required :) :)

Maybe, also at the start, use of NSPR was sort of a proof-of-concept,
but now it's becoming much more than that :)

> I looked briefly at your patch and I don't understand why it affects so
> much non-AUX stuff... I'll look more later.
> 

A/UX is old... SysV; no mmap; "original" POSIX; other stuff. I find
it a good platform to test "genericness" out :) I prefer using FreeBSD
myself, which is weird, being an old SysV-er (one would guess that
I would prefer Linux), but try to keep things going under A/UX when
I can :/  

It'll be fun thinking how autoconf fits into all this :) :)

Cheers!
-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
            cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"

Re: NSPR and 2.0

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> well, the required changes are so ugly :) A/UX doesn't have a mmap
> or support DLL so there's lots of conflicts. In the unix.c file,

Yeah this is why I've been advocating "HAS_FEATURE" macros for NSPR.
Apache doesn't have to use the DLL support, neither does NSPR.  In fact I
disabled it in my linux version for a while when I wanted to statically
link to use gprof.  It would be better if there were a PR_HAS_DSO or other
such macro that is defined when the underlying NSPR library supports DSO.

Similarly for mmap -- it's used for a few things that malloc() and
read()/write() can replace without trouble.  But it's also presented as an
NSPR interface to the app... and that should be protected with
PR_HAS_MMAP.

(Neither are currently used by apache-nspr).

> It'll be fun thinking how autoconf fits into all this :) :)

I think there's already autoconf support in what I just merged in... isn't
there?  I noticed lots of Makefile.ins.  I didn't look further.

Dean