2010/1/5 Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de>: > On 05.01.2010 08:59, jean-frederic clere wrote: >> >> On 01/04/2010 08:50 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >>> >>> 2010/1/4<rj...@apache.org>: >>>> >>>> Author: rjung >>>> Date: Mon Jan 4 16:58:04 2010 >>>> New Revision: 895700 >>>> >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=895700&view=rev >>>> Log: >>>> Fix apr version test i tcnative trunk. >>>> >>>> Modified: >>>> tomcat/native/trunk/native/build/tcnative.m4 >>>> >>> >>>> --- tomcat/native/trunk/native/build/tcnative.m4 (original) >>>> +++ tomcat/native/trunk/native/build/tcnative.m4 Mon Jan 4 16:58:04 >>>> 2010 >>>> @@ -35,8 +35,12 @@ >>>> if test "${1}" -lt "1"; then >>>> AC_MSG_ERROR(You need APR version 1.3.3 or newer installed.) >>>> else >>>> - if test "${2}" -lt "2"; then >>>> + if test "${2}" -lt "3"; then >>>> AC_MSG_ERROR(You need APR version 1.3.3 or newer installed.) >>>> + else >>>> + if test "${2}" -lt "3"; then >>>> + AC_MSG_ERROR(You need APR version 1.3.3 or newer installed.) >>>> + fi >>>> fi >>>> fi >>>> >>> >>> I do not understand the above. What is the difference between these >>> checks? : >>>> >>>> + if test "${2}" -lt "3"; then >>>> + if test "${2}" -lt "3"; then >> >> Should be >> if test "${2}" -lt "3"; then >> if test "${3}" -lt "3"; then >> No? > > Right, sorry, fixed. > > Konstantin: JFC is right, it was meant to also check against the third part > of the minimum apr version "1 . 3 . 3". > > Regards, > > Rainer >
Understood. By the way: you should check the third number only if the second one is equal to "3". Looking at http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html "1.4.x" (or whatever the next minor version might be) should be compatible with 1.3 At least that is what the docs say. Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org