apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: 1.6.0 release candidates
Date Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:43:37 GMT
With patches now accounted for I can pre-test and report back today on AIX,
HPUX and propose a fix to silence the win32 32 -> 16 bit warnings (after
division is done.)

But my inclination is to defer this new feature to a later 1.7+2.0 release.
Shipping a feature that devs would expect to need when it may be largely
unavailable seems a disservice to our end users and these devs.



On Apr 19, 2017 10:45, "Nick Kew" <niq@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:16:37 +0200
> Yann Ylavic <ylavic.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Unfortunately I was not (yet) able to find out, whether there's a
> > > patch for Bug 6738798 available on Solaris 10, or whether we would
> > > break Solaris 10.
> >
> > Maybe we need to "#define APR_USE_PROC_PTHREAD_MUTEX_COND 0" for
> > Solaris 10, and fall back to the generic implementation (spinning
> > sleep)...
>
> I've just (r1791932) made timedlocks a config option on unix-family.
> Defaults to on, but any users getting bitten by it can now use
> --disable-timedlocks and the timedlock function return APR_ENOTIMPL
> (as per earlier discussion, after being bitten by Mac but before
> Solaris versions joined the awkward squad).
>
> Given that two mainstream platforms have bitten us on this in the
> pre-release cycle, it would seem very high risk now to release
> without such a workaround.  We can request that anyone who finds
> themselves having to use it report back to us!
>
> --
> Nick Kew
>

Mime
View raw message