Bug report for APR [2016/12/04]

+---+ | Bugzilla Bug ID | | +-+ | | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned

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