Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 89342 invoked by uid 500); 22 Mar 2000 14:33:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 89331 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2000 14:33:08 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 09:33:05 -0500 (EST) From: rbb@apache.org X-Sender: rbb@shell.ntrnet.net To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: (Probabaly foolish) os.c/os.h question In-Reply-To: <000201bf93b9$d4b4e140$345985d0@corecomm.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: rbb@shell.ntrnet.net X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Get rid of os.c and os.h, and start using APR threads. Ryan > Q.1 - Should os.c (to win32 builds) be killed off entirely, with the code > thrown into winnt.c until we use apr threads? or... > > Q.2 - Can we knock out the ApacheOS project, and leave os.c/os.h > to be wrapped into the ApacheCore project? They just doesn't > seem to call for a library. > > Q.3 - Is this the end for os.c/os.h? Were they to be sqaushed by APR? > > Thanks in advance for explanations and thoughts. > > Bill > > _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------