Greetings,
Some observations when compiling current httpd-trunk for NetWare following recent updates:

1. Both server\util_cookies.c and server\util_filter.c need the APLOG_USE_MODULE() macro in include\http_config.h, but the include\http_log.h only has an 'include' to http_config.h if HAVE_SYSLOG is defined (which is not the case for NetWare);

I added:
 #include "http_log.h"
+#include "http_config.h"
+

to both .c and the files compile, but this may not be the best way?

2. Mod_serf using serf 0.6.1 code fails if USE_WINSOCK is defined;

Compiling D:\Projects\srcs\serf-0.6.1/incoming.c
### mwccnlm Compiler:
#    File: D:\Projects\srcs\serf-0.6.1\incoming.c
# -----------------------------------------------
#      78: rv = l->accept(l->ctx, l, l->accept_baton, in, p);
#   Error:                                          ^
#   ')' expected

Something seems to change the size of a struct if I read this correctly. The previous release of serf (0.3) built without issue.

3. modules\aaa\mod_authn_socache.c builds if this change is made:

--- mod_authn_socache.c.orig    2010-06-24 06:47:46.796875000 +1000
+++ mod_authn_socache.c 2010-06-24 07:11:34.546875000 +1000
@@ -301,11 +301,12 @@
      * to no-longer-defined memory.  Hmmm ...
      */
     apr_status_t rv;
+    const char *key;
     unsigned char val[MAX_VAL_LEN];
     unsigned int vallen = MAX_VAL_LEN - 1;
     authn_cache_dircfg *dcfg = ap_get_module_config(r->per_dir_config,
                                                     &authn_socache_module);
-    const char *key = construct_key(r, dcfg->context, user, NULL);
+    key = construct_key(r, dcfg->context, user, NULL);
     rv = socache_provider->retrieve(socache_instance, r->server,
                                     (unsigned char*)key, strlen(key),
                                     val, &vallen, r->pool);
@@ -342,11 +343,12 @@
                                    const char *realm, char **rethash)
 {
     apr_status_t rv;
+    const char *key;
     authn_cache_dircfg *dcfg;
     unsigned char val[MAX_VAL_LEN];
     unsigned int vallen = MAX_VAL_LEN - 1;
     dcfg = ap_get_module_config(r->per_dir_config, &authn_socache_module);
-    const char *key = construct_key(r, dcfg->context, user, realm);
+    key = construct_key(r, dcfg->context, user, realm);
     rv = socache_provider->retrieve(socache_instance, r->server,
                                     (unsigned char*)key, strlen(key),
                                     val, &vallen, r->pool);

4. modules\aaa\mod_authn_socache.c seems to have different line endings to other source files.

5. modules\lua\lua_request.c build now fails following recent updates:

Compiling lua_request.c
### mwccnlm Compiler:
#    File: lua_request.c
# ----------------------
#     335:                  req_field_apr_table_f func = rft->fun;
#   Error:                                                       ^
#   illegal implicit conversion from 'const void *' to
#   'struct apr_table_t * (*)(struct request_rec *)'
### mwccnlm Compiler:
#     345:                  lua_CFunction func = rft->fun;
#   Error:                                               ^
#   illegal implicit conversion from 'const void *' to
#   'int (*)(struct lua_State *)'
### mwccnlm Compiler:
#     353:                  req_field_string_f func = rft->fun;
#   Error:                                                    ^
#   illegal implicit conversion from 'const void *' to
#   'char * (*)(struct request_rec *)'
### mwccnlm Compiler:
#     362:                  req_field_int_f func = rft->fun;
#   Error:                                                 ^
#   illegal implicit conversion from 'const void *' to
#   'int (*)(struct request_rec *)'
### mwccnlm Compiler:
#     371:                  req_field_int_f func = rft->fun;
#   Error:                                                 ^
#   illegal implicit conversion from 'const void *' to
#   'int (*)(struct request_rec *)'

As noted, these are 'observations', and for NetWare... not really a dev as such, so no real idea what represents bugs or solutions.
Regards,
Norm

Reply via email to