Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 59105 invoked by uid 500); 20 Sep 2001 02:40:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 59094 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2001 02:40:39 -0000 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 19:40:17 -0700 From: Justin Erenkrantz To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: [PATCH] Standardize AcceptMutex config Message-ID: <20010919194017.M12417@ebuilt.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1-pre3 (http://amavis.org/) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Calling the AcceptMutex proc_pthread is just silly. 1.3 got it right by calling it pthread. This would also be one less thing for a person who uses this new feature in 1.3 to change when they upgrade to 2.0. Would anyone raise a fit if I committed this? -- justin Index: server/mpm_common.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/server/mpm_common.c,v retrieving revision 1.67 diff -u -r1.67 mpm_common.c --- server/mpm_common.c 2001/09/18 22:13:57 1.67 +++ server/mpm_common.c 2001/09/20 02:29:39 @@ -604,7 +604,7 @@ } #endif #if APR_HAS_PROC_PTHREAD_SERIALIZE - else if (!strcasecmp(arg, "proc_pthread")) { + else if (!strcasecmp(arg, "pthread")) { ap_accept_lock_mech = APR_LOCK_PROC_PTHREAD; } #endif @@ -621,7 +621,7 @@ ", sysvsem" #endif #if APR_HAS_PROC_PTHREAD_SERIALIZE - ", proc_pthread" + ", pthread" #endif , NULL); }