> > On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> >
> >> It looks like Greg has taken care of Subversion, but did anyone else see
> >> Doug's commit message go by or did my mailer drop it on the floor?
> >
> > i committed at the top-level and it mailed the diff for everything to
> > [EMAIL PROTEC
I'm trying to start the port to Darwin, and whenever the apr build
calls shtool, I get this wierd unhappy spewage:
Unknown option: 1
Usage: head [-options] ...
-muse method for the request (default is 'HEAD')
-fmake request even if head believes method is illegal
-b
"Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > What was checked in doesn't work -- I now get warnings again on
> > > my platform, and mine is the one with the correct prototypes.
> >
> > Hmmm... I get no warnings on a system of each flavor (Tru64 and
> > RedHat 6) and got no warnings. What
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 09:10:48AM -0600, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On Thursday, February 8, 2001, at 12:59 AM, Doug MacEachern wrote:
>...
> > sure:
> > http://apr.apache.org/~dougm/apr_rename.pl
> >
> > quick-n-dirty, but seems to work ok.
>
> It looks like Greg has taken care of Subversion, bu
On Wednesday, February 7, 2001, at 02:54 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I think you meant "ltpath=`dirname $libtoolize`"
buildconf ain't working right for me and configure isn't either :)
Oy. Sorry about that.
-Fred
Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> on lines 278 and 283 you replace put with pupt for apr_os_exp_time_put
> and apr_os_thread_put. i assume that's wrong, since i can't for the
> life of me figure out what pupt would mean ;-)
good for you
if sleeping child cooperates I'll fix it up Rea
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Urgh. Guess it's time for me to subscribe to a new list.
i probably should have done two commits, the apr tree then httpd-2.0
On Thursday, February 8, 2001, at 10:36 AM, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
It looks like Greg has taken care of Subversion, but did anyone else see
Doug's commit message go by or did my mailer drop it on the floor?
i committed at the top-level and it mailed the
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> It looks like Greg has taken care of Subversion, but did anyone else see
> Doug's commit message go by or did my mailer drop it on the floor?
i committed at the top-level and it mailed the diff for everything to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> on lines 278 and 283 you replace put with pupt for apr_os_exp_time_put
> and apr_os_thread_put. i assume that's wrong, since i can't for the
> life of me figure out what pupt would mean ;-)
whoops! you're right, i'll fix that and pupt the changes bac
On Thursday, February 8, 2001, at 12:59 AM, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
+1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
i'll drink to that :)
Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
used (Or is that the one you sent last week
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:59:47PM -0800, Doug MacEachern wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> > +1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
>
> i'll drink to that :)
>
> > Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
> > used (Or is that t
Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Regarding _POSIX_SOURCE:
Trivia on _POSIX_SOURCE from Tru64...
/*
* If user defines _POSIX_SOURCE and if _POSIX_C_SOURCE is not defined,
* define _POSIX_C_SOURCE to be 1. (_POSIX_SOURCE maps to the POSIX 1003.1
* standard from 1990).
*/
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> +1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
i'll drink to that :)
> Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
> used (Or is that the one you sent last week)? This is going to break
> Subversion a bit, and maybe
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Doug MacEachern wrote:
> to see the files that will change and the line number/name change:
> http://perl.apache.org/~dougm/apr_rename.txt
+1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
used (Or is t
to see the files that will change and the line number/name change:
http://perl.apache.org/~dougm/apr_rename.txt
feel free to shout if anything looks wrong, i won't commit for a few
hours.
"Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What was checked in doesn't work -- I now get warnings again on
> my platform, and mine is the one with the correct prototypes.
Hmmm... I get no warnings on a system of each flavor (Tru64 and
RedHat 6) and got no warnings. What warnings do you get
> well, in practice it isn't so excellent :( the template for
> AC_TRY_COMPILE() doesn't even compile without warnings
>
> int main() {
> configure:4111: warning: function declaration isn't a prototype
So we write our own macro that does compile without warnings.
What was checked in doesn't w
Sascha Schumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 7 Feb 2001, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> > Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > > . we *know* that versions of glibc < 2.2 have "const char **"
> > > > > instead of "char **" so
On 7 Feb 2001, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > > . we *know* that versions of glibc < 2.2 have "const char **"
> > > > instead of "char **" so make that work without any hints.m4
> > > > stuff (which w
Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > . we *know* that versions of glibc < 2.2 have "const char **"
> > > instead of "char **" so make that work without any hints.m4
> > > stuff (which would have to look at the glibc version)
> >
> >
"Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > . we *know* that versions of glibc < 2.2 have "const char **"
> > instead of "char **" so make that work without any hints.m4
> > stuff (which would have to look at the glibc version)
>
> Why not check for GCC and simply add -Werror to the com
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> +1 a.s.a.p.
ok, i'm planning todo it later this evening.
> . we *know* that versions of glibc < 2.2 have "const char **"
> instead of "char **" so make that work without any hints.m4
> stuff (which would have to look at the glibc version)
Why not check for GCC and simply add -Werror to the compile?
> This should get RedHat 7.0 compiling cleanly, bu
Sam TH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The easiest way would probably be to use c++ to test this, since in
> c++ cast from a char ** to a const char ** is illegal, and generates
> and error.
c++ is cool, but we can't require it so we'd have to see if it failed
due to no c++, then back down to the
Awesome.
+1
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 07:35:23PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> There are some ideas here previously described by Mo DeJong.
> Additionally:
>
> . there is a way to avoid a warning for a certain platform:
> set apr_iconv_inbuf_const to "1" in hints.m4 for platforms
> where the pa
There are some ideas here previously described by Mo DeJong.
Additionally:
. there is a way to avoid a warning for a certain platform:
set apr_iconv_inbuf_const to "1" in hints.m4 for platforms
where the parm is "const char **" but the autoconf logic
doesn't detect
. we *know* that versions
27 matches
Mail list logo
