Steve Hay wrote:
Let's first look at the apr/pool issue, since it's a new stuff recently added by Geoff.
Does this make any difference?
Index: xs/APR/Pool/APR__Pool.h =================================================================== RCS file: /home/cvs/modperl-2.0/xs/APR/Pool/APR__Pool.h,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.6 APR__Pool.h --- xs/APR/Pool/APR__Pool.h 9 Sep 2003 17:22:39 -0000 1.6 +++ xs/APR/Pool/APR__Pool.h 23 Sep 2003 08:53:57 -0000 @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ /* mark the pool as being created via APR::Pool->new() * see mpxs_apr_pool_DESTROY */ apr_pool_userdata_set((const void *)1, MP_APR_POOL_NEW, - apr_pool_cleanup_null, newpool); + NULL, newpool);
return newpool;
}
No - even the shortest failing test sequence still fails with that.
If not, does reverting this patch makes the problem go away? http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperl-cvs&m=106312839005459&w=2
If so, does it go away completely, or only when this test is run?
Yes - that fixes it completely!
All four of the short test sequences in my previous mail now pass, and, in fact with your patch for filter/in_str_consume.t in place as well, I now have the *entire* testsuite running successfully!
Presumably you don't really want to retract Geoff's patch, though? I'll be happy to test any ammended version of it that you can come up with if you like.
- Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
