From dev-return-23380-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Thu Sep 02 07:16:23 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 99126 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2010 07:16:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 2 Sep 2010 07:16:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 19827 invoked by uid 500); 2 Sep 2010 07:16:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 19421 invoked by uid 500); 2 Sep 2010 07:16:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 19414 invoked by uid 99); 2 Sep 2010 07:16:18 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:16:18 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [194.242.35.75] (HELO dns-factory.at) (194.242.35.75) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:16:12 +0000 Received: from [172.17.100.7] apache@gknw.net [84.63.37.175] by dns-factory.at with NetMail SMTP Agent $Revision: 8582 $ on Novell NetWare via secured & encrypted transport (TLS); Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:15:42 +0200 Message-ID: <4C7F4F08.7080407@apache.org> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:15:20 +0200 From: Guenter Knauf User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: conditional in apr_thread_proc.h References: <4C7E973B.2090106@apache.org> <4C7F43D5.4090503@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <4C7F43D5.4090503@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi R=FCdiger, Am 02.09.2010 08:27, schrieb Ruediger Pluem: > I agree that we should fix this. But as I understand the versioning rul= es, this could > be only done in trunk and 1.5 (not released), as otherwise we would cha= nge the API/ABI on platforms > with APR_HAVE_STRUCT_RLIMIT undefined, correct? hmm, I thought adding a function is not a problem - only=20 changing/removing - or? G=FCn.