On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 13:06:22 +0100 Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de> wrote:
> On 05.02.2013 23:12, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > > Don't know how windows handles the use of two versions of a DLL in > the same process. They must have different file names (not paths); e.g. a versioned dll filename libpcre-7.dll would be distinct from libpcre-8.dll, but most thirdparty vendors don't version and even use entirely unreleated names for dynamic libs on Windows than they had chosen for Unicies. (For ex openssl's LIBEAY32.dll vs libcrypto.so). > For 2.4 I think starting with latest pcre is fine, later major updates > may depend on compatibility again. I agree that breaking binary compatibility changes shouldn't be rolled in once people are using a given major.minor build from the ASF. > expat: currently still bundled directly or inside deps as apr-util > builtin. No strong opinion here whether to use that one or the > latest. I personally would stick to expat for 2.4 and not switch to > libxml2. For 2.4? I can experiment with both solutions. I guess the other question is whether 2.2.24 should be tagged with the original apr-util 1.3 family, or whether we should pick up 1.5.1? And back to the older 2.2.23 sources, should it be the then-current apr-util that was bundled in the .tar.gz distribution?
