[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Glancing through apr-util/xlate/xlate.c, I see tests and uses of both
> APU_HAVE_APR_ICONV and APU_HAS_APR_ICONV. I'm not aware of the
> conventions in place for choosing HAVE vs. HAS -- can someone fill me
> in here? Or, if no such conventions exist, are just there bugs in
> that code?
I should point out that this discrepancy is actually causing a problem
right now, too: Under Win32, apr-util/xlate/xlate.c:apr_xlate_open()
fails. Its using the apr_iconv library, but it tests
APU_HAS_APR_ICONV
...which is unset in the Windows build, because only
APU_HAVE_APR_ICONV is defined. So needed code never gets compiled.
^^^^
-Karl
