On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 6:07 PM, Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de> wrote:
> Am 15.03.2018 um 16:48 schrieb Yann Ylavic:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de>
>> wrote:
>> Index: modules/slotmem/mod_slotmem_shm.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- modules/slotmem/mod_slotmem_shm.c (revision 1826753)
>> +++ modules/slotmem/mod_slotmem_shm.c (working copy)
>> @@ -447,9 +466,9 @@ static apr_status_t slotmem_create(ap_slotmem_inst
>> }
>> ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, rv == APR_SUCCESS ? APLOG_DEBUG :
>> APLOG_ERR,
>> rv, ap_server_conf, APLOGNO(02611)
>> - "create: apr_shm_create(%s) %s",
>> - fname ? fname : "",
>> - rv == APR_SUCCESS ? "succeeded" : "failed");
>> + "create: apr_shm_%s(%s) %s",
>> + fbased && is_child_process() ? "attach" : "create",
>> + fname, rv == APR_SUCCESS ? "succeeded" : "failed");
>> if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
>> return rv;
>> }
>
>
> Removing the fname null check was intentional?
Can't happen, either fbased (this fname != NULL), or fname is set to
"none" above.
Thanks,
Yann.
