httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker worker.c
Date Wed, 20 Mar 2002 17:41:21 GMT
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >   Bring 2.0 up to parity, a bit, with how much info we provide to
> >   the admin regarding valid values for AcceptMutex. Should also
> >   tell 'em what "default" actually maps to, but that can wait.
> I don't think this works as you desired.
> I just did an update (no diffs in this tree) and for a config with no
> AcceptMutex I get this at startup:
> [notice] AcceptMutex: Valid accept mutexes for this platform and MPM
> are: default, fcntl, sysvsem, pthread.
> Isn't that the message for httpd -L output?
> The 1.3 startup message is something like this:
> [notice] Accept mutex: fcntl (Default: fcntl)
> much more appropriate
> -- 

Actually, it does exactly what I intended, for the present. :)

Agreed, and this is part of what I alluded to above about "tell 'em
what default is"... For right now, since TAKE1 is a macro, you
can't use normal preprocessor "foo " "bar" concats to build up the
supported string, so the info message for AllowMutex is hard to
be very 1.3-like. So, the place to put it is in error log (we need
*some* way of noting valid mutexes). Ideally the solution is
something that reports what default maps to, but it requires some
APR work and some consolidation since the MPM's make use of
different locking calls (apr_proc_mutex_lock, apr_lock_acquire)
and thus need a good solution for a common function for something
like ap_mutex_method_name() with the addition of the name to
the actual lock structs...

   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [|]
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson

View raw message