Tobias has discovered a twist to the apr_off_t problem which requires
us to take a step back.
As I've detailed at length, using apr_off_t in our APIs is bad because
(in decreasing order of importance):
* It interacts badly with perl right now.
* It interacts badly with a possible future APR change
* It interacts badly with callers or callees which might be built
Unfortunately, eliminating it from our API is hard or worrisome
* We use it in lots of places in the diff interface, and fixing that
happens to dovetail into a secondary problem, that the diff
interface doesn't use pools in a lot of places where it probably
* Our svn_io APR wrappers use apr_finfo_t, which contains an
apr_off_t. We can't reasonably duplicate the apr_finfo_t
structure to work around this problem.
* svn 0.37 comes out tomorrow, and some of us were really hoping
that it would be equal to svn 1.0 in all respects for the version
number. Putting in a big change now isn't great.
So, we need to think about targeted solutions. There are three areas
of the API in play here:
1. The blame callback uses an apr_off_t for the line number. It is
easy to change this to use an apr_uint64_t instead. (The current
#1710 patch does this.)
2. The diff library uses apr_off_t all over the place. We can fix
that by introducing svn_offset_t, and also introducing pool
parameters all over the place. This is a good change, but it's
also a big change, and not necessarily appropriate for 0.37.
(The current #1710 does this.)
3. The svn_io wrappers use apr_off_t and apr_finfo_t. The best we
could do here is to declare those wrappers to be private for now,
which would be a giant rename. (The current #1710 patch uses
svn_offset_t in places of apr_off_t, but does not address
Although (2) and (3) may bite us if we don't fix them (particularly if
APR 1.0 changes the meaning of apr_off_t), the most important thing to
fix is (1), because without that fix, we can't have working perl
wrappers for blame. (Without (2), we can't have working perl wrappers
for libsvn_diff, but I don't know if such a thing is really important,
and Joe Orton thinks it may be possible to fix perl in the long run.)
Certainly, we don't care about perl wrappers for (3).
So, I think the thing to do right now is create a patch for (1) (it
will be something like a one-line change) and merge it in tonight for
0.37. On a slightly more leisurely schedule, we can work out a big
patch for (2) and (3). Then we can argue about whether it's
appropriate to roll an 0.38 in order to get that patch in.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Fri Jan 23 23:16:50 2004