From: rst@ai.mit.edu (Robert S. Thau)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:31:06 -0400
Message-Id: <199608061631.MAA17533@volterra.ai.mit.edu>
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Subject: Re: random questions...
Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com

  Not as I understand it. It would be a) difficult and b) pointless to maintain
  non-threaded versions of stuff that uses threading. I think that at the very
  least rsthreads (or equivalent) will be required. Since rsthreads is
  exceedingly portable I can't see that this is a problem.

I'm not sure I agree... look at the LDAP reference software.  The code
is written in a "thread-aware" style.  On machines without thread
support, it's still supported, by means of a file which provides
trivial implementations (single-thread case only) of the functions
used by the code.  Such "null threading" doesn't eliminate the
dependancies completely, but it makes it perfectly manageable to build
non-threaded and threaded versions of their server from the same code
base without drowning in #ifdefs.

rst