On 7/26/2010 5:30 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > I'm a bit undecided whether to port some changes between APR and > APR-UTIL branches: > > - r780882 (wrowe): fix vpath building for xml/expat (removing > "configure" target in Makefile.in) > The change is in the 1.3.x branch, but neither in any older nor newer > branches.
I think forward porting is fine, this wasn't much more than an mkdir, right? > - r979102 (rjung): Updating buildconf.sh and configure.in for in > xml/expat to allow building with libtool 2. Applied to 1.5, 1.4 and 1.3. > Should I backport to older branches, or do we want to stay very > conservatve here? I'd say backport, because otherwise we might run into > the same problem we had with the first tarball for 2.2.16 again, namely > that the machine of the RM is to modern, even when preparing e.g. an > httpd 2.0 release. 1.2 isn't shipping or supported. For luddites, patching 0.9 branch is fine, though there isn't likely to be a release except for a security flaw fix. > - r979109 (rjung): Updating config.guess and config.sub to allow for > better detection of modern platforms. Applied to APR 1.3, ..., trunk and > apr-util 1.3, ..., 1.5. I suggest applying to the old branches as well. Again, the only old branch is 0.9.
