apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Donovan <donov...@bellatlantic.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] DBD drivers as DSOs
Date Thu, 01 Mar 2007 03:16:12 GMT
re: could you also address the M4 stuff in your patch?

     Done.  This patch removes the no-longer-needed reference to APU_DSO_BUILD from dbd.m4.

There was no need to change the build in any way.

--with-dbname  and --enable-dbd-dso work just as they did before to build static or dynamic
dbd drivers.

This patch removes the restriction that prohibits using dso drivers at runtime if any static
are linked into APR.  It always allows dso drivers (unless, of course, the platform doesn't
dso - are there really any OSs left which don't support dynamic libraries?)

Seems like nitpicking - but unlike dbm, there are potentially *lots* of useful dbd drivers,
using several different ones (possibly supplied by 3rd parties) in the the same process seems


I tested by simultaneously using a static and a dso driver (mysql and pgsql) in the same process.
This worked for me on both Windows and Linux.


Bojan Smojver wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 21:12 -0500, Tom Donovan wrote:
>> I'm puzzled by the implicit rule in apr_dbd.c that if one or more static dbd drivers
are configured, 
>> dso drivers aren't allowed.  Also by the fact that dso dbd drivers need to be explicitly
> I would venture a guess that it's probably unintentional, but maybe Joe
> wanted to make sure that people that want to build the old way can still
> do so. Not sure...
>> This patch to 1.3 works for me on Windows.  I haven't tried it on Unix yet.
>> It dispenses with the whole --enable-dbd-dso/APU_DSO_BUILD thing and just enables
dso dbd drivers if 
>> dso is enabled - regardless of whether there are any static dbd drivers or not.
> Once you start playing with the Unix side of things, could you also
> address the M4 stuff in your patch?

View raw message