Plüm wrote:
>
> I wouldn't say that it is a no-op on Unix. Some logger programs might
> expect an open stderr, even if this points to /dev/null. So I am not in
> favour of this patch. Besides I understood that we no longer support
> Win9x. So why making an exception here?
> IMHO if things do not w
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Many thanks to Ruediger for reviewing 2.0 and 2.2 so far, and to both
Jim and Jeff for their reviews of current/2.2 modern flavors. I could
use a set of eyeballs on the final log.c patch for 2.2, and the patch
set for our old 'n crusty 2.0.
I'm especially interested
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: William A. Rowe, Jr.
> Gesendet: Montag, 27. August 2007 10:28
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: svn commit: r569947 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS
>
>
> So the model didn't work, and for NT I propose to
Many thanks to Ruediger for reviewing 2.0 and 2.2 so far, and to both
Jim and Jeff for their reviews of current/2.2 modern flavors. I could
use a set of eyeballs on the final log.c patch for 2.2, and the patch
set for our old 'n crusty 2.0.
I'm especially interested if any Win32 folks want to tak
