If a platform doesn't have setenv(), then apr_env_set() uses putenv()
with memory allocated from whatever pool it was given. Putenv() keeps a
reference to that memory in the environment. If that pool is ever
cleaned up, then the environment ends up with a pointer to
who-knows-what.
The doc
On 29 Mar 2010, at 2:38 PM, Dan Poirier wrote:
If a platform doesn't have setenv(), then apr_env_set() uses putenv()
with memory allocated from whatever pool it was given. Putenv()
keeps a
reference to that memory in the environment. If that pool is ever
cleaned up, then the environment
On 2010-03-29 at 09:16, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
I think registering a proper cleanup to remove the environment
variable on pool cleanup is the way to go, possibly with the addition
of apr_env_setn() that sets the environment without a corresponding
cleanup (ie current
On 29 Mar 2010, at 3:36 PM, Dan Poirier wrote:
I don't think that's the right pattern to follow. apr_table is used
to
allocate a new data structure, owned by the caller, and the caller
certainly should control its lifetime. apr_env_set() is used to add
an
entry to the OS's environment,
[CC to d...@apr.apache.org]
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Fuhrmann [mailto:stefanfuhrm...@alice-dsl.de]
Sent: zondag 28 maart 2010 14:51
To: d...@subversion.apache.org
Subject: [PATCH] delta_files() speedup 3/3: file write buffering
Hi devs,
this is part of the delta_files()
Hi all,
today I noticed that the pool member in the apr_pollfd_t structure isn't
used at all within APR! Why should there an associated memory pool? What
is the purpose of this field then?
From include/apr_poll.h:
/** Poll descriptor set. */
struct apr_pollfd_t {
apr_pool_t *p;
Ping? This patch addresses a crash that exists in both 1.4.x and
trunk, and is quite straightforward.
Neil
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Neil Conway n...@cs.berkeley.edu wrote:
Any feedback on this patch? The bug it addresses exists in both 1.4.x and
trunk.
Neil
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at
On 29 Mar 2010, at 18:19, Neil Conway wrote:
Ping? This patch addresses a crash that exists in both 1.4.x and
trunk, and is quite straightforward.
I don't see the patch in this post. Is it small/simple/clear enough to
review in a brief-ish session? A bugzilla entry for it would be something
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Nick Kew n...@apache.org wrote:
I don't see the patch in this post. Is it small/simple/clear enough to
review in a brief-ish session?
Yep, should be very straightforward. Attached are two versions of the
patch (one for the 1.4.x branch, one for trunk). The
