Hi, > Speaking of 3+1's > William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >> >> If anyone objects to >> >> @ -183,7 +183,7 @@ >> apr_file_t *infile; >> apr_dbm_t *outdbm; >> >> - apr_initialize(); >> + apr_app_initialize(&argc, &argv, NULL); >> atexit(apr_terminate); >> >> verbose = 0; >>
> There's no 2.0.x of this file, but if someone would add a third +1 > (Rudiger blessed this on the 21st) for this 2.2.x backport, that > would be nice, and consistent with our policy. (That other crufty > whitespace change was already backed out.) +1 without having tested, but from what I see all other ht* support tools use apr_app_initialize() too, so this seems right to me. Guen.
