RE: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-04 Thread Joshua Slive
From: Victor J. Orlikowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ugh. Behind on mail. My fault; needed it for cadaver for testing... ;) Victor: You need a little context on your mail. I don't know about others, but I have no idea what you are replying to. Joshua.

RE: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-04 Thread Victor J. Orlikowski
My apologies. The context was to provide a semi-humorous reply to the breakage I caused Jeff by installing Expat on the AIX box we use. Been a while since the mail, been a while since I posted last. Grrr. ;) Victor -- Victor J. Orlikowski | The Wall is Down, But the Threat Remains!

Re: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
Victor J. Orlikowski wrote: Ugh. Behind on mail. My fault; needed it for cadaver for testing... ;) Why do I feel like I just entered an episode of 6 Feet Under? :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-02 Thread Jeff Trawick
Ian Holsman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: the NW patch is in there. the non-crap tarballs are in the /dist directory. +1 for FreeBSD 3.4... I unpacked it, did binbuild, did the binbuild installation, and hammered* it over local LAN with 200,000 requests (mix of CGI, / to drive lots of wrowe

Re: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-02 Thread Jeff Trawick
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm still struggling with the tarball on AIX. I think it is just a matter of cleaning up libtool 1.3 droplets so that a fresh buildconf does what it is supposed to do. That and, for me, working around the fact that somebody installed an expat RPM on

Re: lose the underscores! (was: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2))

2002-02-02 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
From: Ben Hyde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 9:20 PM Greg Stein wrote: On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 05:34:51PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: ... http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/httpd-2_0_31-alpha.tar.gz Why can't we name our damned tarballs and resulting

Re: lose the underscores! (was: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2))

2002-02-02 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 11:03 AM From: Ben Hyde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 9:20 PM Greg Stein wrote: On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 05:34:51PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: ...

Re: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-02 Thread Jeff Trawick
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm still struggling with the tarball on AIX. I think it is just a matter of cleaning up libtool 1.3 droplets so that a fresh buildconf does what it is supposed to do. That and, for me, working around the

Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-01 Thread Ian Holsman
the NW patch is in there. the non-crap tarballs are in the /dist directory. who would have thought making a tar ball would be so hard. ..Ian

Re: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-01 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 04:46:58PM -0800, Ian Holsman wrote: the NW patch is in there. the non-crap tarballs are in the /dist directory. who would have thought making a tar ball would be so hard. No kidding. It'll be easier next time. After initially thinking there was a problem with

lose the underscores! (was: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2))

2002-02-01 Thread Greg Stein
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 05:34:51PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: ... http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/httpd-2_0_31-alpha.tar.gz Why can't we name our damned tarballs and resulting directories like all other packages out there? For example: httpd-2.0.31-alpha.tar.gz unpacks into:

Re: lose the underscores! (was: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-01 Thread Lars Eilebrecht
According to Greg Stein: Why can't we name our damned tarballs and resulting directories like all other packages out there? For example: httpd-2.0.31-alpha.tar.gz unpacks into: ./httpd-2.0.31-alpha/ +1! ciao... -- Lars Eilebrecht - Don't hate yourself in the morning

Re: lose the underscores! (was: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2))

2002-02-01 Thread Ben Hyde
Greg Stein wrote: On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 05:34:51PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: ... http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/httpd-2_0_31-alpha.tar.gz Why can't we name our damned tarballs and resulting directories like all other packages out there? A superstitious behavior involving

Re: lose the underscores! (was: Apache 2_0_31 is now rolled (take 2)

2002-02-01 Thread Ian Holsman
Lars Eilebrecht wrote: According to Greg Stein: Why can't we name our damned tarballs and resulting directories like all other packages out there? For example: httpd-2.0.31-alpha.tar.gz unpacks into: ./httpd-2.0.31-alpha/ +1! I just built it with the ./httpd_roll_release script so if