On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:10 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On 3/23/2011 7:02 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >>> >>>> Repeating my requests from last year: >>>> >>>> I would really like to see r960665 ported back and released in the next >>>> release to fix this Apr issue, before Subversion 1.7.0 goes in public beta. >>> >>> Any concerns out there with this fix for Windows? There's no CHANGES >>> entry, so it may have been overlooked. >> >> (wrowe discussed this previously, and may or may not get time to >> resolve in the short term) > > I'll be able to propose the resolution by midday Thursday and make sure that > Bert and I are satisfied with the solution from the svn perspective. > >>> A couple of other fixes in trunk CHANGES to consider backporting: >>> >>> *) apr_dbd_oracle: fix endianness issue in prepared statements >>> PR 50690 [Stefan Ruppert <sr myarm.com>] >>> >>> *) Fix address handling when accepting an AF_INET socket from a socket >>> bound as AF_INET6. PR 49678. [Joe Orton] >> >> I forgot about these two, and will go look. >> >> What else before 1.4.3/1.3.11? >> >> * wrowe is working on another issue which (I guess) requires a couple more >> days >> * I may find time to backport some revisions from trunk to get MinGW >> in better shape if I'm "sure" it won't break anything else >> ** several trunk revisions of .in/.m4 foo will get 1.4.x running the >> test suite pretty well; call it "experimental" since the feature set >> doesn't exactly match a normal Windows build, it only builds static >> libs, etc.) > > The issues I'm working on should be wrapped up by Thursday evening.
have a new ETA?
