Re: mutex ipc semaphore

1999-07-29 Thread Ralf S. Engelschall
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999, Khimenko Victor wrote: > 28-Jul-99 13:14 you wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 28, 1999, Simon Weijgers wrote: > > >> I can't seem to find a configure option to enable ipc semaphore support > >> in modssl. Does this mean it isn't stable yet? > > >>From the user manual under "SSLMutex

Re: mutex ipc semaphore

1999-07-29 Thread Khimenko Victor
28-Jul-99 13:14 you wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 1999, Simon Weijgers wrote: >> I can't seem to find a configure option to enable ipc semaphore support >> in modssl. Does this mean it isn't stable yet? >>From the user manual under "SSLMutex": > (http://www.modssl.org/docs/2.3/ssl_reference.html) >

Re: mutex ipc semaphore

1999-07-29 Thread Mark Dedlow
> From the user manual under "SSLMutex": > (http://www.modssl.org/docs/2.3/ssl_reference.html) > > o sem > > This is the most elegant but also most non-portable Mutex variant > where a SysV IPC Semaphore (under Unix) and a Windows Mutex (under > Win32) is used when possible. It is only a

Re: mutex ipc semaphore

1999-07-28 Thread Simon Weijgers
On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 1999, Simon Weijgers wrote: > > > I can't seem to find a configure option to enable ipc semaphore support > > in modssl. Does this mean it isn't stable yet? > > >From the user manual under "SSLMutex": > (http://www.modssl.org/doc

Re: mutex ipc semaphore

1999-07-28 Thread Ralf S. Engelschall
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999, Simon Weijgers wrote: > I can't seem to find a configure option to enable ipc semaphore support > in modssl. Does this mean it isn't stable yet? >From the user manual under "SSLMutex": (http://www.modssl.org/docs/2.3/ssl_reference.html) o sem This is the most elegant b