Fine. Congratulations. Yet again we are stopped from making any progress because people refuse to work together and instead we have to use fscking vetos to play together.
The old API sucks. It is unusable, causes mistakes, and doesn't allow for a fully featured API. But let's put it back. I'm going away for a few more days. I was a lot happier when I wasn't reading this e-mail list. Ryan ---------------------------------------------- Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Pane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 8:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [design] work around new apr_poll leakage? > > Ryan Bloom wrote: > > >>The current API has a memory leak that makes it unsuitable for > >>general-purpose use (including the httpd). That's why I vetoed it. > >> > >> > > > >Thatis just BS. This conversation started today with a solution to the > >memory leak. > > > > The conversation started with the showstopper in the httpd STATUS. > My veto from three days ago still stands: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apr-dev&m=102705248212752 > I'm happy to see the increased discussion of potential fixes, but that > discussion alone doesn't resolve the veto. The only two ways to resolve > the veto are to: remove the new poll code, or replace it with a variant > that doesn't have the memory leak and O(n) scalability problem. > > --Brian >
