[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