Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Errors-To: <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20041119195907.06649ec0@pop3.rowe-clan.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:01:29 -0600
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Subject: Re: [NOTICE] CVS to SVN migration complete
Cc: dev@apr.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <20BD7D09FE72AAE1D4601067@st-augustin.ics.uci.edu>
References: <1100891614.3516.111.camel@grunt.striker.nl>
 <20041120014943.1507f466@parker>
 <20BD7D09FE72AAE1D4601067@st-augustin.ics.uci.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 06:52 PM 11/19/2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>--On Saturday, November 20, 2004 1:49 AM +0100 Andr=E9 Malo <nd@perlig.de>=
 wrote:
>
>>Just a question:
>>Maybe I'm missing the info - is the httpd trunk supposed to work with the
>>apr 1.0.x branch or just the apr trunk?
>
>We're going to have to decide which APR branch/release httpd 2.1/2.2 should=
 work with - and, we'll have to decide soon.  Whichever we pick, we need to=
 stick 2.2 to a *released* version of APR.  At this point, without a=
 compelling argument, I'd vote for 1.0.x.  -- justin

I'll offer compelling argument.  Allen offered patches, which
Roy vetoed, to fix object sizes on 32/64/64 ILP bit platforms,
and told Allen to go back and fix APR.

That is the right answer, branch APR 1.x, fix on svn trunk (2.0.0)
and commit the right code in httpd-2.2 such that an allocation
of memory is consistently size_t and an allocation of disk is
consistently off_t, and none of which has anything to do with int
or long.

Bill