Hmm, looking at our apr_proc_t, I see we _also_ use plain pid_t in there (and define it in apr.h on platforms that don't have it). This explains why we don't have an apr_os_proc_get -- users will simple use the pid member from apr_proc_t. But we don't have one of those in apr_proc_t at all, which seems just a bit strange to me, and upon reflection I think that apr_proc_t is fundamentally broken because of that. It might be a bit hard to unbreak it while still maintaining backward compatibility, though...
-- Brane Äibej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
