Hi folks,
here's a patch for APR's build system (trunk) so that httpd won't
need a complete source tree to find it, but will be happy with
an installed version.
rjung looked over my shoulder, so I'm fairly certain the list
of files is now complete.
So long,
i
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 8
On 5/15/2011 11:44 PM, Igor Galić wrote:
>
> I went ahead and opened up an INFRA ticket
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3637
>
> I volunteer to help infra with the setup of the build
> and the dependencies.
>
> The final goal is to consume the successful apr and
> apr-util build
On 5/15/2011 11:36 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 16 May 2011, at 12:15 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>
>>> All the changes in your laundry list that hadn't already been done on trunk
>>> have now been
>>> applied to trunk, most specifically the reordering of the parameters and
>>> the removal
Hey folks,
We discussed getting automatic builds for httpd at the
Apache retreat this weekend, and as essence realized that
a very good first start would be to have APR in buildbot
first and see how that goes.
My experience from Traffic Server is that it goes actually
very well, so after discuss
On 16 May 2011, at 12:15 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
All the changes in your laundry list that hadn't already been done
on trunk have now been
applied to trunk, most specifically the reordering of the
parameters and the removal of
apr_crypto_t where apr_crypto_block_t was already present i
On 5/15/2011 3:33 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2011, at 3:38 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>
>> Guessing you are catching up on list traffic sequentially and you'll note
>> that
>> Jeff clarified this wasn't about apr-util 1.4 at all. Presuming we want some
>> apr-util 1.4/1.5, I'll ge
On 15 Apr 2011, at 3:38 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Guessing you are catching up on list traffic sequentially and you'll
note that
Jeff clarified this wasn't about apr-util 1.4 at all. Presuming we
want some
apr-util 1.4/1.5, I'll get the review done shortly against *trunk*
anticipating
On Sun, 15 May 2011, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to add some more gcc attribute annotations to
our header to mark parameters that must not be NULL, etc. We already have
some of these for format string.
In order to not break other compilers, I thought to just include
Hi,
I think it would be a good idea to add some more gcc attribute annotations
to our header to mark parameters that must not be NULL, etc. We already
have some of these for format string.
In order to not break other compilers, I thought to just include
#if !defined(__GNUC__)
#define __attri
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
10 matches
Mail list logo