On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> - For Ian's mod_gz, I removed the dependency on zutil.h as it is static
> and OS_CODE seems to defined as part of the RFC (I may be wrong here).
> Most installations do not include zutil.h in their install (such as
> Solaris), so we can't expect it to be there. This *may* require
> adding the zlib license for those chunk of lines. It seems to be a flaw
> in zlib that they require an internal definition for actual use.
We can do it either way, I don't care. If we snarf in the OS_CODE stuff
from zutil.h, then we include the ZLIB license in mod_gzip.c. If we use
zutil.h, we just have a general acknowledgement of the zlib authors in
mod_gzip.c and the full ZLIB license in zutil.h itself (as it already is,
I'm sure).
> - The str* funcs are thread-safe on any platform we care about.
> If the libc implementations aren't thread-safe, there are other
> problems that we'll have in the core that mod_gzip's thread-safety
> will be the least of our problems.
Agreed.
> - npp isn't completely bogus - I did essentially the same thing in
> flood. I did:
> r->uri ? r->uri : ""
> instead. No need for a separate function though.
I should have been more explicit. It's not bogus to do a conditional like
the one you just displayed. I thought it was excessive to make it a whole
separate function that's only used in one place. I thought it was bogus
to set it to the string "NULL" instead of the empty string, though
coincidentally a string that says "NULL" works out fine in the one place
where this function is used. Then there the fact that I can't think of a
way that r->uri would ever be NULL. Can it really? Even when there is no
r->uri, we set it to the empty string. That was that whole INTERNALLY
GENERATED bogosity that we scratched our heads over for a while and then
Ryan fixed it by setting it to "". Under what circumstances will
r->uri==NULL?
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charlottesville, VA
