(whoops, meant to respond to both places; I hate this list setup)

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:
On 02 Oct 2013, at 3:40 PM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com> wrote:

There is also the apr_escape API from v2.0 which has not been backported yet.

That doesn't work on Windows; relies (or just uses?) some non-portable escape sequence...  I see the warnings roll by during compile and the testcase fails but I haven't taken the time to investigate.

Another ping on those details.

I posted a patch to dev@apr with subject "[PATCH] apr escape API, portability issues seen on Windows".
 

The apr_escape API consists simply of code that has been historically scattered around the httpd codebase, none of the code is new. If there are warnings on Windows it could be caused by #ifdef's not correctly specified or something similar, without seeing any of the warnings though I cannot comment.

In the mean time I will backport the API to get the ball rolling.

Please don't put the gcc extension escape sequence into a stable branch without protecting the code from other compilers.  Really, all of the code affected by the patch needs to be considered first.
 

Regards,
Graham
--




--
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/



--
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/