Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Tom Donovan
Roy T. Fielding wrote: This is a showstopper. It must be fixed in 1.3.x before release. My fix is also incomplete: All of the other DBD drivers that do not have redistributable client libraries must also default off. Oracle is one for sure -- I am unaware of the terms for the other drivers.

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Nick Kew
On Sun, 11 May 2008, Tom Donovan wrote: Was it discovered that the MySQL exception doesn't work? Or is the concern about incorporating APR or httpd into commercial software? Well, sort-of. The exception seems a little problematic in cases where APR is re-used in cLosed-source software.

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Roy T. Fielding
On May 11, 2008, at 6:23 AM, Tom Donovan wrote: Roy T. Fielding wrote: This is a showstopper. It must be fixed in 1.3.x before release. My fix is also incomplete: All of the other DBD drivers that do not have redistributable client libraries must also default off. Oracle is one for sure

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Paul Querna
Roy T. Fielding wrote: I suggest that the way forward is to separate DBD from apr-util and make it capable of finding and remapping the DB shared libraries at initialization time, rather than compile time. *cough* It already supports that:

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 05/11/2008 08:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: Actually, I don't understand how this is supposed to work at all. Having these interfaces in a library means that anything we pick as a DBD interface must be redistributed with the binaries. An operating system distro may be able to pick and

Re: svn commit: r655138 - /apr/apr/trunk/poll/unix/select.c

2008-05-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Lucian Adrian Grijincu wrote: On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: } -if ((*num) = j) +if (((*num) = j) != 0) wouldn't just another set of parentheses fix it? if (((*num) = j)) Actually, ((*num = j)) is legit, or ((*num = j) != 0) for clarity. The (*num)

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Nick Kew
On Sun, 11 May 2008 21:35:46 +0200 Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/11/2008 08:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: I suggest that the way forward is to separate DBD from apr-util and make it capable of finding and remapping the DB shared libraries at initialization time, rather

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 21:35 +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote: This already works if you compile apr-util (trunk / 1.3) with --enable-dbd-dso Maybe that should be the default, combined with disabling of MySQL/Oracle drivers by default due to possible downstream licensing issues? -- Bojan

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Ruediger Pluem wrote: On 05/11/2008 08:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: I suggest that the way forward is to separate DBD from apr-util and make it capable of finding and remapping the DB shared libraries at initialization time, rather than compile time. This already works if you compile

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 18:36 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Are there concerns that this is either insufficiently portable or stable enough to serve as our 1.3 default? Not sure about portability, but it is as stable as linking the drivers directly. -- Bojan

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Tom Donovan
Roy T. Fielding wrote: This is a showstopper. It must be fixed in 1.3.x before release. My fix is also incomplete: All of the other DBD drivers that do not have redistributable client libraries must also default off. Oracle is one for sure -- I am unaware of the terms for the other drivers.

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 20:35 -0400, Tom Donovan wrote: Maybe that should be the default, combined with disabling of MySQL/Oracle drivers by default due to possible downstream licensing issues? I agree that --enable-dbd-dso should be the default (presuming the platform supports dso), but

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Tom Donovan
Bojan Smojver wrote: On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 20:35 -0400, Tom Donovan wrote: Maybe that should be the default, combined with disabling of MySQL/Oracle drivers by default due to possible downstream licensing issues? I agree that --enable-dbd-dso should be the default (presuming the platform

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Tom Donovan wrote: Roy T. Fielding wrote: The concern is that someone building a program like httpd, on a platform that just happens to have a lot of databases installed, will automatically compile into apr-util hard dependencies on all of those libraries even though they have no intention

Re: sendfile in darwin

2008-05-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Jim Jagielski wrote: On May 7, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Geoff Greer wrote: Of course reverting the change (adding the rv=0 line again) causes the httpd tests to fail. The Darwin impl assumes that it is very much like FreeBSDs except for the variation in arguments and the fact that we aren't sure

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 21:08 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Yes - drop any automatically detected dbd provider who's license is more restrictive than APR's. If someone such as a linux distro (GPL) wants to turn back on the mysql dbd, this is their prerogative. And enable dbd-dso by

Re: DBD driver license issues (must default to --without-driver)

2008-05-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 12:55 +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote: In r655174 and r655403 of the trunk now. Backported to 1.3.x in r655404. -- Bojan

Why the 'size' is aligned twice in apr_pCalloc()

2008-05-11 Thread zengwm
Hi, I have a question of aligning the 'size' in apr_pCalloc() [apr_pools.c]. apr_pCalloc() calls apr_palloc() to do the memory allocation in the pool. It aligns the 'size' parameter before calling apr_palloc(). And the size is aligned again in apr_palloc(). Why 'size' has to be aligned twice?

Re: Why the 'size' is aligned twice in apr_pCalloc()

2008-05-11 Thread Bojan Smojver
On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 11:19 +0800, zengwm wrote: apr_pCalloc() calls apr_palloc() to do the memory allocation in the pool. It aligns the 'size' parameter before calling apr_palloc(). And the size is aligned again in apr_palloc(). Why 'size' has to be aligned twice? Can the first alignment (