Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
From: "Mladen Turk" <mturk@mappingsoft.com>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Cc: "New-Httpd" <new-httpd@apache.org>,
	"William A. Rowe Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Subject: RE: [REWRITE] htpasswd.c
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 23:06:12 +0200
Message-ID: <ACEJIPMOHLJJDLGBJKPGIEAHCCAA.mturk@mappingsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <3BACF447.6050209@apache.org>
Importance: Normal


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Holsman [mailto:ianh@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 10:28 PM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Cc: New-Httpd; William A. Rowe Jr.
> Subject: Re: [REWRITE] htpasswd.c
>
> Hi Mladen.
>
> There is another problem at the moment,
> auth_dbm doesn't need to use apr_dbm to store it's
> password DB.  (I don't even think that it is the default)

Know that.

The apr-util apr_dbm is the only thing that makes sense to me. I know that
there are lots of dbm-alikes out there, and almost all of them has some kind
of ndbm interface. Unfortunately this is true only on the UNIX platforms.
So I come with the common denominator and that is apr_dbm at the moment.

When apr_dbm gets (I hope) some kind of run-time dbm selection mechanism
instead of compile-time, the things will get much more easier.

I have a running port of dbm-1.85 that uses apr instead of unistd.h. When I
tested it on Linux I'll put it for the review. That will solve auth_db
(well, not version 2 and 3 from Sleepycat).

I really didn't test the binary file compatibility between apr-util SDBM and
ndbm that comes with each *NIX box. If you think that they are incompatible
then what is the reason for SDBM in the apr-util at all?
But if they are then I don't see any problem.


MT.