Lars Hjemli <hje...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld <ja...@zx2c4.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Eric Wong <normalper...@yhbt.net> wrote: > >> This. I prefer we keep passing around the ctx variable to keep the code > >> more flexible for future reuse. Of course, IIRC git itself has this > >> limitation, too... > > > > Can anyone confirm or deny this? Is it a pointless endeavor because of > > git's design? > > Supporting something like FCGI in cgit will require a fork(2) for each > request, before invoking libgit.a functions, since these functions are > not generally reentrant (they tend to use global state and/or > inconveniently die(3)).
Unfortunately true for now, but libgit.a could evolve (or cgit can use something like libgit2 instead). _______________________________________________ CGit mailing list CGit@lists.zx2c4.com http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/cgit
