"Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Greg? I guess it is preferable to keep it in CPPFLAGS only
> > temporarily (for the test) and put it in INCLUDES once we find that it
> > works?
>
> Yes, unless it is required for later tests. Macros need to save and restore
> any global make
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 07:08:30AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Sascha Schumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> >
> > > I don't understand why an include doesn't go onto the INCLUDES variable. Why
> > > the shift?
> >
> > I suppose that the include
Sascha Schumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > I don't understand why an include doesn't go onto the INCLUDES variable. Why
> > the shift?
>
> I suppose that the include directive is immediately needed
> for an autoconf cpp check. Autoconf ca
On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> I don't understand why an include doesn't go onto the INCLUDES variable. Why
> the shift?
I suppose that the include directive is immediately needed
for an autoconf cpp check. Autoconf calls the preprocessor
with CPPFLAGS, not INCLUDES, and t
I don't understand why an include doesn't go onto the INCLUDES variable. Why
the shift?
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 03:32:02AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> trawick 01/12/08 19:32:02
>
> Modified:modules/experimental config.m4
> Log:
> Add -I for the zlib include dir to the right f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> don't segfault if we don't have/need a lock
> Index: mod_mem_cache.c
> -apr_lock_acquire(sconf->lock);
> +/* XXX Need a way to insert into the cache w/o such coarse grained locking */
> +if (sconf->lock) {
> +apr_lock_acquire(sconf->loc
