Mailing-List: contact apreq-dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of bojan@rexursive.com
 designates 218.214.6.102 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <1106873093.41f98b0548524@imp.rexursive.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:44:53 +1100
From: Bojan Smojver <bojan@rexursive.com>
To: Joe Schaefer <joe+gmane@sunstarsys.com>
Cc: apreq-dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [multi-env] privatizing apreq_request_t and apreq_jar_t
References: <20050112221409.GA20209@roonstrasse.net>
 <876520kmfq.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com> <87d5vsc20f.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com>
 <20050126082026.GB2127@roonstrasse.net>
 <87ekg694ff.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com>
 <20050127175230.GA15384@roonstrasse.net>
 <87acqu91d6.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com>
 <1106869171.41f97bb340220@imp.rexursive.com>
 <87oefa77cf.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <87oefa77cf.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.5

Quoting Joe Schaefer <joe+gmane@sunstarsys.com>:

> > while((status=ap_get_brigade(r->input_filters,brigade,
> >                              AP_MODE_READBYTES,APR_BLOCK_READ,
> >                              HUGE_STRING_LEN))!=APR_SUCCESS)
> >     ; /* nothing */
> >
> > Should actually do the work that ap_discard_request_body() does,
> > right? More or less, I mean.
>
> More or less. Actually the loop you wrote should segfault, because it's
> illegal to pass a non-empty brigade to ap_get_brigade.

I didn't include the part of code that creates an empty brigade. That's a bit
further up :-)

> I'd say it's the recommended approach for response handlers
> (the only folks truly authorized to throw away the post data).
> Everything else (auth handlers, output filters, etc.) should
> just ignore the spooling issues and just let libapreq2 work
> its magic.

OK, thanks.

--
Bojan