Bill, William A. Rowe Jr. schrieb: > Guenter Knauf wrote: > I didn't say that. Refer to the prior commit message when this API was > added, this seemed to be a reasonable assumption. well, I admit that my commit message might be a bit misleading; but if you look at the revision: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=663941 it makes more sense: the "added usage of threadsafe getpass_r()" refers to this part of the commit: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/passwd/apr_getpass.c?r1=663941&r2=663940&pathrev=663941 while "enabled HAVE_GETPASS_R for NetWare platform" refers to this: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/trunk/include/arch/netware/apr_private.h?r1=663941&r2=663940&pathrev=663941
> And I'm glad to learn that. Reverting now, thanks for clarifying this. thanks, seen your commit. > Sorry that I haven't see such an email, obviously by design. If the topic > of that email was technical discussion, such as this proposed refactoring > of apu_config.h + apu.h into the apr_put the rivate.h + apr.h, or support for > autoconf vs msvc vs scons, such a discussion would belong on this list. agreed, and I mixed it up -- it was only a sentence I got posted in a private IRC chat :) > Including apr.h from apr_private.h would be one such workaround, sure. ok, thanks for committing. > From my grep of the source tree, the apu.hnw file was never referenced, > so I presume the NWGNUmakefile schema wasn't building apr-2.0 in the > first place ;-? well, I did adopt recently for APR/APU merge; and prior to your changes all compiled fine; but now after your corrections I guess it will do again ... :) -- I will get told in IRC soon ..., hehe ... Sorry, but currently I am on another project, and thats the reason why I didnt fix it self directly. Another breakage I was told about is also fixed now with Ruediger's commit 892718. thanks, Gün.
