Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 27 December 2016 at 22:08, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> >> >> Regarding my current problem: I'm getting the following when I attempt >> to build expat: >> [[[ >> runtestspp.obj : error LNK2019:

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > > Regarding my current problem: I'm getting the following when I attempt > to build expat: > [[[ > runtestspp.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol > _align_limit_to_full_utf8_characters referenced in function

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 24.12.2016 18:56, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > CMakeCache.txt On 24 December 2016 at 13:36, Branko Čibej > wrote: >> On 24.12.2016 08:23, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > CMake pollutes working copy with some unrelated files. ...it does? I don't think I've had any pollution with my

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

CMakeCache.txt On 24 December 2016 at 13:36, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 24.12.2016 08:23, Ivan Zhakov wrote: CMake pollutes working copy with some unrelated files. >>> >>> ...it does? I don't think I've had any pollution with my workflow, since >>> CMake gives you the option

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 24.12.2016 08:23, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >>> CMake pollutes working copy with some unrelated files. >> >> ...it does? I don't think I've had any pollution with my workflow, since >> CMake gives you the option to separate the build tree from the source tree. >> What files do you see showing up? >> >

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 21 December 2016 at 07:50, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Nov 30, 2016 23:23, "William A Rowe Jr" wrote: > > Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? > > I'd personally like to see an API harmonising memcache to redis, but that > can't

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 21 December 2016 at 10:05, Jacob Champion wrote: > Ooh, this caught my eye. Mild apologies for poking my head in. > > On 12/20/2016 10:48 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> >> The problem with generators like CMake that they multiply problems in >> MSVC + SDK. > > > Can you expand

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

I'm thinking that trying to do a 1.6 release in Jan 2017 makes some sense. It would help in some httpd things. As far as I can tell, everyone is in agreement, but wanted clarity to make sure. thx.

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

Ooh, this caught my eye. Mild apologies for poking my head in. On 12/20/2016 10:48 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: The problem with generators like CMake that they multiply problems in MSVC + SDK. Can you expand on this? I'm quite happy with CMake + APR 2.0 + httpd on Windows for my test builds. I

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 17 December 2016 at 10:54, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 1:34 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> >> On 3 December 2016 at 18:40, William A Rowe Jr >> wrote: >> > On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Ivan Zhakov

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Dec 20, 2016 22:50, "William A Rowe Jr" wrote: Ensure we build well with distributing expat. *without* (sorry - please excuse tablet keyboard.)

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Nov 30, 2016 23:23, "William A Rowe Jr" wrote: Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? I'd personally like to see an API harmonising memcache to redis, but that can't possibly be a showstopper to any incremental release. What other active itches can be

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 1:34 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 3 December 2016 at 18:40, William A Rowe Jr > wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > >> 1. Currently apr 1.6.x doesn't build on Windows using

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 3 December 2016 at 18:40, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> 1. Currently apr 1.6.x doesn't build on Windows using makefiles: >> [[[ >> link.exe @C:\Users\ivan\AppData\Local\Temp\nm2BCE.tmp >>Creating

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 12/3/2016 4:11 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: As for I, the only problematic VC IDE is 10 because it simply refuses to recognize /implib which is a baked in bug. Instead it names the import library the same as the project so

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 12/3/2016 4:11 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: Right off the bat, with 1.6, we should enable IPv6 out of the box. I couldn't agree more on this. I was going to mention it but evidently I spaced it.

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: > As for I, the only problematic VC IDE is 10 because it simply refuses to > recognize /implib which is a baked in bug. Instead it names the import > library the same as the project so all consumers trying to link to >

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

As for I, the only problematic VC IDE is 10 because it simply refuses to recognize /implib which is a baked in bug. Instead it names the import library the same as the project so all consumers trying to link to apr-1/libapr-1.lib cannot. The majority of squeaking over the years seems to be

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 03.12.2016 16:40, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > I'm wondering, where do we go on trunk with 2.0 on Windows, > now that we can emit solution/project files from CMake, or just > straightforward .mak files? It insisting on a local install of CMake > all that much of a hassle for the Windows build

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > > 1. Currently apr 1.6.x doesn't build on Windows using makefiles: > [[[ > link.exe @C:\Users\ivan\AppData\Local\Temp\nm2BCE.tmp >Creating library .\x64\Release\libapr-1.lib and object > .\x64\Release\libapr-1.exp >

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 1 December 2016 at 08:23, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > Even as httpd is operating under paralysis by analysis, we are long past a > year since the last releases. > > Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? > > I'd personally like to see an API harmonising

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:23 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > Even as httpd is operating under paralysis by analysis, we are long past a > year since the last releases. > > Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? > > I'd personally like to see an API

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

Please ignore my comments about this. thx On 11/30/2016 10:27 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: On 11/30/2016 10:05 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: revert As for cmakelist.txt, I doubt this is going to work any longer, at least at those paths; SET(EXPAT_SOURCES xml/expat/lib/xmlrole.c

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Nick Kew wrote: > > > On 1 Dec 2016, at 04:23, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > > > Even as httpd is operating under paralysis by analysis, we are long past > a year since the last releases. > > > > Is there anything holding up

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

> On 1 Dec 2016, at 04:23, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > Even as httpd is operating under paralysis by analysis, we are long past a > year since the last releases. > > Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? > > I'd personally like to see an API harmonising

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

> On 1 Dec 2016, at 04:23, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > Even as httpd is operating under paralysis by analysis, we are long past a > year since the last releases. > > Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? > > I'd personally like to see an API harmonising

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 11/30/2016 10:05 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: revert As for cmakelist.txt, I doubt this is going to work any longer, at least at those paths; SET(EXPAT_SOURCES xml/expat/lib/xmlrole.c xml/expat/lib/xmltok.c xml/expat/lib/xmlparse.c )

Re: 1.6 apr/apr-util scope/timetable?

On 11/30/2016 9:23 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: Even as httpd is operating under paralysis by analysis, we are long past a year since the last releases. Is there anything holding up the jumps to 1.6, or 2.0? I'd personally like to see an API harmonising memcache to redis, but that can't