apr-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From wr...@apache.org
Subject svn commit: r589910 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES configure.in
Date Mon, 29 Oct 2007 23:33:00 GMT
Author: wrowe
Date: Mon Oct 29 16:32:59 2007
New Revision: 589910

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=589910&view=rev
Radical change that corrects a horrible misassumption; the feature
APR_HAS_LARGE_FILES means that we support offsets larger than memory
could contain.  An audit of the code reveals no functional changes
in the compilation of the library.  The testlfs.c source proves that
this is the assumption of the users of this 'undocumented feature'.

In fact, it's not possible to properly determine this publicly to
adjust testlfs.c based on any other public symbol from the library.


Modified: apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES?rev=589910&r1=589909&r2=589910&view=diff
--- apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES [utf-8] (original)
+++ apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES [utf-8] Mon Oct 29 16:32:59 2007
@@ -1,6 +1,12 @@
                                                      -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
 Changes for APR 1.3.0
+  *) Corrected for Darwin and others to toggle APR_HAS_LARGE_FILES
+     where large off_t's are enabled without any extra defines, hints
+     or additional functions.  This is binary compatible, but apps
+     may need to be recompiled to take full advantage depending on how
+     they detect this feature.  [William Rowe]
   *) Implement apr_atomic_casptr() and apr_atomic_xchgptr() for z/OS.
      [David Jones <oscaremma gmail.com>]

Modified: apr/apr/trunk/configure.in
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/configure.in?rev=589910&r1=589909&r2=589910&view=diff
--- apr/apr/trunk/configure.in (original)
+++ apr/apr/trunk/configure.in Mon Oct 29 16:32:59 2007
@@ -1413,6 +1413,10 @@
     # Enable LFS
     AC_CHECK_FUNCS([mmap64 sendfile64 sendfilev64 mkstemp64 readdir64_r])
+elif test "${ac_cv_sizeof_off_t}" != "${ac_cv_sizeof_size_t}"; then
+    # unsure of using -gt above is as portable, can can't forsee where
+    # off_t can legitimately be smaller than size_t
+    aprlfs=1

View raw message