rahul at Sun
Sep 19, 2008, 1:45 AM
Post #4 of 6
(223 views)
Permalink
|
Pinging the list once again,
If atleast the below goes in, it would be possible to submit patches
to increase the coverage independently of the build patches. (I would
like to add more coverage in other interesting modules too.)
| - discussion on dtrace patches by Theo seems to have wound down
| lately, with only the build steps being problematic.
|
| Here is the least that we could do while the conf|build steps are
| figured out. (so that more probes can be added in the meantime.)
|
| 1) we need apache_probes.h to be generated from apache_probes.d in all
| platforms so that the macros AP*ENTRY|RETURN are defined. (For those
| without dtrace, it needs to be generated by scripts.)
| the changes in ap_config.h depends only on this.
|
| 2) ap.d, and apache_probes.d are independent, and could be added to
| the trunk or left as patches to be integrated once the conf|build steps
| are finalized..
|
| 3) The same with changes in each of *.c files, perhaps bugs(enh) with
| a 'Dtrace' keyword? so that new entries can be added as patches by
| others.
|
| Once this is done, we can split the effort into well defined areas, and
| continue in each independently.
|
|
| | This is just a followup to a previous mail:
| |
| | http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200805.mbox/%3C6AFBCFE8-4CCA-4A02-8A43-F9170689695D[at]omniti.com%3E
| |
| | The apr-utils include mod got immediate uptake. Thanks Paul!
| |
| | I didn't see much progress on the rest of it. How do I got about
| | guiding through the patch acceptance process? Or am I dense and it
| | was indeed committed and I'm just looking in the wrong place.
rahul
--
1. e4 _
|
