Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 08:15:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache 2.0 alpha. (again)  :)
In-Reply-To: <20000309004243.27496.qmail@mithrandir.innovation.ch>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003090812280.17769-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Life is hard, and then you die. wrote:
>...
> To be specific, the changes involve moving the sha1 and base64 encoding
> stuff from apache to apr, get Basic authentication working with SHA1
> passwords again, have some fixes to ap_lock (type and scope are mixed
> up), and should hopefully get mod_auth_digest working (the random seed
> stuff still needs adding to apr, but I'll wait with that).
> 
> Side question: ap_validate_password() is currently in apr - should it
> move back to apache (src/ap/) again? It seems somewhat too Apache
> specific for apr.

Does any of that really make sense in APR? It doesn't seem to have any
portability issues? (well, the random seed stuff does) It seems like the
SHA1 and base64 encoding would simply be Apache routines.

Of course, we do have tables and arrays in APR, but it seems that if we
continue to follow this route, then we'll end up putting all "general
utility" functions into APR. It wouldn't be just a portable runtime
anymore.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/