[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Inexcusable BDB upgrade triple blunder

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: 2006-02-28 13:57:10 CET

Jim Blandy wrote:
> You know, this may be an argument for a new APR operation:
> /* Ensure that the pool ENDURING will be freed after the pool
> TRANSIENT. The two pools must have some common ancestor pool
> (possibly the root pool --- is there a root pool?), and ENDURING must
> be an immediate child of that ancestor pool. */
> void apr_free_pool_after (apr_pool_t *enduring, apr_pool_t *transient);
> Then you'd always ensure the cache pool was going to be freed after
> whatever pool was containing the svn_fs_t.
Yes, I was thinking along those lines, too (all APR pools have a common
ancestor, there's exactly one "really" global pool in APR). The trouble
is that changes to APR tend to take quite a while to show up in
distributions. And, this being a new API, we'd only be able to add it in
APR's trunk, not back-port is to the released branches.

-- Brane

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Feb 28 14:01:07 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.