the precompiled apache version is definitely 2.2.0 (according to httpd -V)
and there is definitely some mismatch between request_rec size between it
and my compiled module. Of course i don't know it for sure because i don't
know the exact sizeof(request_rec) in the precompiled apache. In my module
the sizeof is 424.

what other details can i supply in order to get to the bottom of this?



On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:51 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On 11/9/2011 3:07 PM, Asaf Dalet wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>> i have a problem which is bugging me for a couple of days now:
>>
>> i have a module written for apache 2.2.x and compiled as 32-bit on
>> solaris 9 SPARC 64-bit.
>> i have a precompiled apache core on a different solaris 9 (also 64-bit).
>>
>> the problem: sizeof(request_rec) in the module <> sizeof(request_rec) in
>> the precompiled
>> apache core.
>>
>> my suspicion is that sizeof(apr_off_t) is different between the binaries.
>> My module has it
>> as 8 bytes and the apache core has it as 4 bytes.
>>
>> two questions:
>> 1. how can this be? can i compile apache to use 4 bytes apr_off_t on a 64
>> bit solaris?
>> 2. is it possible to force the compiler to compile my module with 4 bytes
>> apr_off_t?
>>
>
> This makes no sense because you noted apache 2.2.x - Jeff is correct
> that these distinctions only happen on apache 2.0.x where large files
> might or might not be enabled.  This should NOT happen with any distro
> of apache 2.2.x - if you see one - please follow up here and point it out..
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
> See 
> <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/**userslist.html<http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html>>
> for more info.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> users-unsubscribe@httpd.**apache.org<[email protected]>
>  "   from the digest: 
> users-digest-unsubscribe@**httpd.apache.org<[email protected]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to