httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <>
Subject Re: AIX: ld -bI:httpd.exp vs. ld -lhttpd
Date Mon, 24 Mar 2003 18:28:30 GMT
Stas Bekman wrote:
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> The shared object has symbols that aren't intended for use by 
>> applications, whereas the .exp file doesn't.  Personally, I think it 
>> is a good thing that we have a tight control over our API, so I think 
>> in terms of getting httpd.exp fixed instead of forgetting about that 
>> mechanism altogether.
> So, you say that it's a better practice to use the exp file than the 
> shared object. Especially since I still not sure what the shared object 
> is in case of httpd (in contrast to apr/apr-util which are libs).

yes, in my opinion it is better practice to use the exp file

>> mod_perl has been caught before on AIX calling functions which weren't 
>> intended to be part of the API because of the use of httpd.exp.  Is 
>> that useful to anybody?
> Sorry, I'm not following you here. You just said above that using 
> httpd.exp is the safest since it only provides symbols which are exported.

this was an attempt at anecdotal support for what I mentioned earlier...

more clearly:

a couple of years ago mod_perl wouldn't build on AIX because it called 
an httpd function which wasn't listed in httpd.exp...  it wasn't listed 
in httpd.exp because it wasn't an intended part of the API...

View raw message