apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr/locks/unix crossproc.c locks.c proc_mutex.c
Date Fri, 05 Apr 2002 13:23:16 GMT
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> There is a big difference between "can be used" and "should be used."
> flock() "can be used" on a bunch of systems but nobody went to the
> trouble to add the right AC_CHECK_LIB() function to pick up BSD
> compatibility stuff because nobody wants to use it on those systems
> because the performance is not up to par with the other choices.
> What you are saying is they "should be used" on Darwin.  Sorry, but I
> cannot agree that that is anything but platform specific knowledge
> :)

What is or is not "should be used" for Darwin is besides the point.
Posix sems needs some place in the priority list. SysV sems are nice, but
they are risky because they can fill up the sem tables if the processes
core dump. Posix sems don't have that problem, and are therefore a
"better" alternative. This implies they be placed higher than SysV.

As far as stupid, f*cking, bogus systems that don't implement it correctly,
then that's what the hell APR_DECISION_OVERRIDE and hints is for.
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson

View raw message