Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Sender: trawick@bellsouth.net
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: [?PATCH?] using getpwnam_r in mod_userdir
References: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0011102254120.1760-200000@rossini.schumann.cx>
From: Jeff Trawick <trawickj@bellsouth.net>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 17:48:16 -0500
In-Reply-To: Sascha Schumann's message of "Fri,
 10 Nov 2000 23:04:29 +0100 (CET)"
Message-ID: <m34s1fphov.fsf@adsl-77-241-65.rdu.bellsouth.net>
Lines: 28
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Sascha Schumann <sascha@schumann.cx> writes:

>     Our "user" code like mod_userdir.c should just assume that
>     getpwnam_r exists. If it does not exist, we can provide a
>     fallback which serializes access to the OS-function.
>     Otherwise, we start duplicating work-arounds and checks all
>     over the place.
> 
>     I'm attaching such a fallback for getpwnam_r. There are two
>     issues with this:
> 
>     -   ACQUIRE_LOCK/RELEASE_LOCK should be defined to mutex-like
>         functions, if we are compiling thread-safe (otherwise,
>         they are nops).
>     -   The getpwnam_r function should be prefixed properly to
>         avoid conflicts with system functions which have the same
>         name, but another interface.

Another issue (perhaps not affecting more than one system): it
assumes that getpwnam() isn't thread-safe.  If getpwnam() is
thread-safe, we don't need the lock and we don't need to copy.

How many of these reentrant function issues have come up with PHP?

-- 
Jeff Trawick | trawick@ibm.net | PGP public key at web site:
     http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
          Born in Roswell... married an alien...