On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 11:00:42AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: > > Pardon? I would have thought that 2.0 is a leap forward in the portability > department. Care to explain? >
Fpr example, did you ever try and build httpd-2.0 on a machine where the compiler does NOT support "long long" and "unsigned long long"? Apr will happily use "long double" for the int64 type, and "unsigned long double" (care to explain what the hell that is?!?) as the uint64 type. And hardwired constants (like 0x01B21DD213814000LL in srclib/apr/misc/unix/getuuid.c) make it impossible to provide a workaround. The requirement "only guaranteed to compile with gcc" _is_ a portability problem, and 1.3 _did_ try to provide an alternative path for older systems. After all, the world does not only consist of Win32 and Linux. Martin -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fujitsu Siemens Fon: +49-89-636-46021, FAX: +49-89-636-47655 | 81730 Munich, Germany
