apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Hudson <ghud...@MIT.EDU>
Subject Re: Solving the off_t problem in APR 1.0
Date Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:02:22 GMT
On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 13:00, Kean Johnston wrote:
> > That looks great: I'll commit your patch to the 0.9 branch unless there
> > are any objections.  Thanks a lot for working on this issue.
> My personal opinion is that its approaching the issue the wrong way. I 
> think first and foremost, we need to establish why ABI compatibility 
> with a 0.9 release is so important.

Even if APR adds large-file support in 1.0 by bashing the apr_off_t type
to off64_t where available, it still makes sense to solve this problem
on the 0.9 branch, since httpd 2,x is stuck there and Subversion 1.x
would wind up stuck there.

> On a typical system that we are likely to care about today ... how many 
> things are actually using APR that cant be (and arent being) easily 
> updated? The two largest consumers of APR are Apache and SubVersion 
> right? SVN is chnaging daily, and Apache frequently enough that it is 
> unlikely to cause too much pain.

SVN is in a final four-week soak period before its 1.0 release.  A
change to the apr_off_t type would cause an incompatible change in SVN's
ABI, which we cannot tolerate before our 2.0 release, which might be
five years off.  (It turns out that eliminating apr_off_t from the svn
API is too hard, because of the apr_finfo_t type and because of
scheduling.)


Mime
View raw message