httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: Tag 1.3.23?
Date Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:44:21 GMT
Upon closer inspection, ap_rprintf() has been NON_STD for ages, so it's fine as is. Not
sure why it showed up on Rowe-san's list :-o

Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Stoddard" <bill@wstoddard.com>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: Tag 1.3.23?


> Looks like ap_rprintf is still broken (or fixed in a way that is binary incompatable
:-)
> I'll fix this now...
>
> Bill
>
> > No, the original code was, simply, broken.  We must find a way to break
> > compatibility for modules using _those_few_functions_, alone.  They are;
> >
> > ap_snprintf
> ap.h - Ok
>
> > ap_table_do
> ap_alloc.h - Ok
>
> > ap_bvputs
> buff.h - Ok
>
> > ap_rprintf
> http_protocol.h - broken
>
> > ap_log_error
> http_log.h - OK
>
> > ap_log_rerror
> http_log.h - OK
>
> > ap_log_printf
>
> http_log.h - OK
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message