From dev-return-6231-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Sun Apr 14 00:43:03 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 32096 invoked by uid 500); 14 Apr 2002 00:43:02 -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 32085 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2002 00:43:02 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: cancer.clove.org: jerenk set sender to jerenkrantz@apache.org using -f Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 17:43:09 -0700 From: Justin Erenkrantz To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." Cc: Sander Striker , dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: UUID logic required in APR? Message-ID: <20020413174309.W11810@apache.org> Mail-Followup-To: Justin Erenkrantz , "William A. Rowe, Jr." , Sander Striker , dev@apr.apache.org References: <20020412235222.T11810@apache.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20020413123418.022ba9b0@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020413123418.022ba9b0@localhost>; from wrowe@rowe-clan.net on Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 12:36:09PM -0500 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 12:36:09PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > At 03:11 AM 4/13/2002, you wrote: > > > From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:jerenkrantz@apache.org] > > > Sent: 13 April 2002 08:52 > > > > > Do we really have to have the UUID functions in APR? Could we move > > > them to apr-util? > > > >+1 on moving it. > > -1 on moving it, unless we are dumping the Win32 uuid.c source which > uses the OS to generate uuid's. Is there any reason not to use the variant in the unix directory? This way our UUIDs will be consistent across platforms. -- justin