Bill,
I guess I don't follow your comment. mpm_netware.c still follows
the same scheme as other MPM's in that it respects HARD_SERVER_LIMIT, it
just makes sure that it is never anything other than 1. All references
to the scoreboard always use 0 for the server slot and a thread id for
the thread slot. If somebody recompiles the code with HARD_SERVER_LIMIT
set to 0, which is ridiculous, then they get way they deserve. If they
set it to something greater than 1 then they are just wasting memory
because it is physically impossible for NetWare to start more than one
instance in the same name space. Is there something else I should be
concerned about.
thanks,
Brad
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:32:39 AM >>>
> Jeff,
> I think that the mistake I made here was not changing the error
> message text. I had changed HARD_SERVER_LIMIT to HARD_THREAD_LIMIT
on
> purpose because NetWare does not have processes. Therefore we will
> never have more than one server anyway and in fact the NetWare MPM
does
> not even provide a way for the user to change MAX_SERVERS because it
> doesn't make sense for us. Is there any reason why you changed this
to
> HARD_SERVER_LIMIT other than it didn't seem to make sense with the
> message text? If not, I will go ahead and change it back with the
> appropriate message text.
Brad,
If they build with an inappropriate setting for HARD_SERVER_LIMIT,
3rd
party modules will be horked. Please follow the convention here, so
we
are all eating our own dogfood - and are less likely to introduce 3rd
party
bugs.
Bill
