Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA08571; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 05:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from devsys.jaguNET.com (devsys.jaguNET.com [206.156.208.6]) by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA08525 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 05:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jim@localhost) by devsys.jaguNET.com (8.8.5/jag-2.4) id IAA28151 for new-httpd@apache.org; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:42:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Jagielski Message-Id: <199706131242.IAA28151@devsys.jaguNET.com> Subject: Re: Missing headers for small requests? To: new-httpd@apache.org Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:42:36 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <199706130157.UAA10258@sierra.zyzzyva.com> from "Randy Terbush" at Jun 12, 97 08:57:36 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Randy Terbush wrote: > > > Alexei Kosut wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote: > > > > > > > It's been proposed several times. But needs a revamp of the i/o system to > > > > do it... hey can we agree that we want to use sfio? If so then someone > > > > can get working on integrating sfio. > > > > > > It's always been my plan to integrate an IO package like sfio into > > > Apache 2.0. However, is sfio itself the best choice? While I've not > > > heard anything specific (nor have I checked specifically), I've heard > > > random things in passing that seem to indicate there are problems with > > > sfio. RST used sfio in an early apache-XX, then switched over to > > > bstdio. > > > > > > > I think RSTs reason for the switch was the bstdio was more portable > > than sfio, esp when one considers the configuration tool ('iff'?) > > used to do the initial configs. Also, bstdio seemed a LOT faster. > > I think that the sfio/bstdio/whatever debate is still up in air. > > The consensus is that we need our our stdio routines, but not which > > is best. > > [Still digging through the backlog] > > Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the fact that Perl 5.004 > now has an sfio option would make me lean toward using that if we > can to reduce redundant code. > Does the sfio-stuff work in Perl? The docs seem to suggest it very experimental at this point (Perl's IO abstraction) -- ==================================================================== Jim Jagielski | jaguNET Access Services jim@jaguNET.com | http://www.jaguNET.com/ "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"