Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 11463 invoked by uid 500); 16 May 2000 16:51:50 -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 11442 invoked from network); 16 May 2000 16:51:48 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: koj.rkbloom.net: rbb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 09:53:10 -0400 (EDT) From: rbb@covalent.net X-Sender: rbb@koj.rkbloom.net To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: A silly question perhaps... In-Reply-To: <024101bfbf54$fb8a34c0$c1e01b09@raleigh.ibm.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Tue, 16 May 2000, Bill Stoddard wrote: > Where do we set the accept serialization (USE_FCNTL_SERIALIZED_ACCEPT, et. al.) now? We don't get that fined grain in Apache anymore. Basically what happens is: Each MPM defines SAFE_ACCEPT or something like it based on NO_SERIALIZED_ACCEPT. SAFE_ACCEPT then calls an APR function which knows what kind of mechanism to use for SERIALIZATION on each platform. I do not see where NO_SERIALIZED_ACCEPT is defined anywhere, but it could be in a generated file, which I haven't generated yet. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------