Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 28247 invoked by uid 500); 14 Dec 2001 20:35:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 28236 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 20:35:54 -0000 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:35:58 -0800 From: Justin Erenkrantz To: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: apr/memory/unix apr_pools.c Message-ID: <20011214203558.GK1439@ebuilt.com> References: <20011214201410.50388.qmail@icarus.apache.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20011214201410.50388.qmail@icarus.apache.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.2i X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1-pre3 (http://amavis.org/) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 08:14:10PM -0000, trawick@apache.org wrote: > @@ -124,7 +124,11 @@ > > struct allocator_t { > apr_uint32_t max_index; > +#if APR_HAS_THREADS > apr_thread_mutex_t *mutex; > +#else > + void *mutex; > +#endif > apr_pool_t *owner; > node_t *free[MAX_INDEX]; > }; Do we even need to define mutex when threads aren't present? -- justin