httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <>
Subject Re: 1.3 versus 1.3.1
Date Thu, 11 Sep 1997 17:53:47 GMT
Paul Sutton wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Sep 1997, Alexei Kosut wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Sep 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> > > Where's NT at?  we dunno really, right?  'cause we need to release another
> > > version and get more people to whack on it.  I honestly think we'll be
> > > stuck with several betas, enough to shake out bugs with those two
> > > features.
> >
> > Well, I think NT's close. Although I think OS abstraction should wait
> > until later, I'd like to see an os_absolute_path macro somewhere, because
> Does this mean that you don't think the patches to *enable* OS-specific
> abstractions (i.e. in os/*/os.{c,h})  should be committed for 1.3? If
> committed, it ould enable the few os abstractions required for 1.3 to be
> implemented in a consistent manner. I am worried if we don't have the
> ability to add os specific code now, when 1.3 becomes a binary realese and
> the floodgates are opened to every NT user to try Apache, we *will* get a
> lot of NT bugs. They'll all be fixed by patching the code with #ifdef
> WIN32 sections and things will get unmanageable. If the patches are in we
> can, were required, abstract Win32 code to fix the bugs.

Put it this way - I'm not going to be fixing NT bugs with loadsa WIN32
sections, I'll be using abstractions. So, Paul should add his stuff.



Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435|Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472|
and Technical Director|Email: |Apache-SSL author
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG"

View raw message