I'm also thinking of the # of patches OtherBill is folding in as well... By "bumping" the tag, do you mean having the tag say something like APACHE_1_3_23_R2 or something? Not APACHE_1_3_24 right? :) :)
Bill Stoddard wrote: > > The tarball hasn't been rolled, so if the change is simple, why not make the change >and > bump the tag? This method has worked pretty good for 2.0 if we impose a reasonable >time > limit between the tag and the roll (say 24 hours). > > Bill (who really doesn't mind if we go to 1.3.24) > > > I have a feeling that this implies a 1.3.24... The real fix is > > to include the correct header, or determine if it's even > > needed. > > > > Thomas Eibner wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 03:53:31PM -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: > > > > "Victor J. Orlikowski" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Argh!!!! > > > > > Not this *again*. > > > > > *Sigh*. > > > > > Which linux distribution? > > > > > > > > RH 7.1. This was building for 1.3.22, so I'm pretty sure > > > > this is something new. > > > > > > I just tried it on my debian, with the ndbm.h symbolic link it works, > > > without it breaks. So I'd say it's a linux problem. It's been happening > > > to me for ages on my new debian boxen until I did the link from gdbm-ndbm.h > > > > > > -- > > > Thomas Eibner <http://thomas.eibner.dk/> DnsZone <http://dnszone.org/> > > > mod_pointer <http://stderr.net/mod_pointer> > > > > > > > > > -- > > =========================================================================== > > Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ > > "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order > > will lose both and deserve neither" > > > -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither"
