apr-bugs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43329] - apr_proc_create behavior change
Date Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:26:27 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43329>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43329





------- Additional Comments From Tom.Donovan@acm.org  2007-09-09 07:26 -------
I should have been clearer about #2.  A case is where the parent's
(non-inheritable) stdin handle is also passed in attr as child_in.  It is set to
inheritable, but never reset to not-inheritable before leaving apr_proc_create.
Probably an edge case anyway.

re: "the larger context" - Agreed, APR should be as platform-independent and
consistent as possible. Alas, FastCGI programs are the real-world issue.  If it
was just a matter of updating a few modules like mod_fcgid, mod_fastcgi et. al.
this would probably be OK.  The problem is not in these modules, but in all the
target executables which these modules run in external processes.  These target
exes include common ones like php-cgi.exe (which probably *could* also be
changed if necessary) and many one-off or in-house exe's which have been ported
from Unix fastcgi over the years since APR change 63707 in 2002.  These target
executables acquired a built-in dependency on INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE for stdout &
stderr on Windows.  Finding and re-building all these targets is the painful
part of accommodating this APR change.

re: "the old behavior was a bug, conveinent to a limited number of cases"
I think some (particularly the fastcgi library developers) interpreted the
change to pass INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE as an intentional change, albeit a
Windows-specific one.

re: "your program" - It's ironic!  Many Win/Apache sites depend on some variant
of fastcgi.  I'm one of the rare ones who don't.  My only affected programs were
constructed just for testing this release. I'm just sympathetic to the majority
who do need it fixed.

The comments in my proposed patch are inappropriately httpd-specific for an APR
function and should probably be changed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@apr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@apr.apache.org


Mime
View raw message