apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Quick things, apr/apr-util releases
Date Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:37:23 GMT
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> trawick@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> The previous paragraph acknowledges that we aren't worried if somebody
>> codes against in-flux APIs in that apr-util packaged with httpd 2.3.4.
>> What is the problem scenario here? How can the exchange of
>> apr-util-1.4.0-dev with apr-util 1.4.1 hurt unless the user has some
>> code that relies on in-flux APIs?
>
> On some platforms (windows) the library will fail to load if the number
> of args to an apr_fn(x,y,z) signature change.  Win32, for example, will
> decorate the link symbols with the number of bytes of stack args, e.g.
> apr_initialize is 'apr_initialize@0'.  But on most platforms, such a
> change in the number of args is silently harmful.
>
> Similarly, for Graham's work on the apr_crypto_t structure, moving the
> apr_crypto_driver_t element or adding the *error pointer in the middle
> of the existing declarations will silently slaughter a provider compiled
> under 1.4.1+++ but running under 1.4.0-dev.

I thought that was covered by

"Paul and I agree that we shouldn't be working to accommodate a
*developer* who programs against an API that shipped by httpd labeled
'-alpha'.  It wasn't an apr-util release, they shouldn't have any such
expectations."

Mime
View raw message