On Saturday, March 10, 2001, at 12:42 AM, Andrew Ho wrote:
> --disable-rule=EXPAT
>From the httpd-2.0 configure script:
if test "$enable_dav" != "no"; then
apache_need_expat=yes
Chuck
Chuck Murcko
Topsail Group
http://www.topsail.org/
The damage is (un?)done, builds on Win32, serves content, .tar, .zip (signed) and
-win32-x86-unsupported.zip binaries are in ~wrowe, awaiting review, unix compression
and signature of the rm... ready for the site.
Thanks for the patience.
Bill
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 11:47:20AM -0800, Andrew Ho wrote:
> Have you looked at Apache 1.3.12 and up? They allow you to use the syntax:
>
>
> ServerName www.myserver.com
> ...
>
>
> This is super convenient and eliminates the IP managing annoyance. I think
> this would
On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> I don't think it has anything to do with mechanics, nor will throwing more
> process at the problem fix it. (more process will simply bog down what we
> can accomplish)
...? if nothing else:
cd apr
cvs tag -b apr_dev [needs recursive option]
cd ..
mkdir
> create a release based on an ongoing frantic development tree, all you
> have to do is selectively tag the repository to include only those
> revisions that you consider to be stable. There is no rule that requires
> the entire HEAD to be tagged at once, and there is nothing wrong with
> moving
Is this the 2.0.14 tarball or a fresh tree? It sounds like a fresh tree,
but I want to be sure. The 2.0.14 tarball compiles on linux just fine for
me.
Ryan
On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > I know I said I would release the alpha's today
>
> FWIW,
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 03:20:41PM -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>...
> FWIW, it is not building for me on Linux (RH 6.2).
> Everything is dynign because libexpat cannot be
> found. This is after 'make clean' and even after
> a completely vanilla checkout.. Here is the log.
> Am I missing
O.K.
So I missed getting the patch in early this morning. However...
Joe Orton states that we can come up with something better; I'll delay
any commits on this issue till I've had a better chance to examine a
couple of things he has pointed me to.
Off for a week on the Keys; I'll be spotty on co
Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> I know I said I would release the alpha's today
FWIW, it is not building for me on Linux (RH 6.2).
Everything is dynign because libexpat cannot be
found. This is after 'make clean' and even after
a completely vanilla checkout.. Here is the log.
Am I missing something obvi
In a message dated 01-03-10 14:50:32 EST, Bill writes...
> If you are interested in continuing this discussion beyond this note, please
> lets do it off list to not bore everyone to death.
No need. I think you just answered the only thing I was really
curious about in this (final) response.
>
If you are interested in continuing this discussion beyond this note, please
lets do it off list to not bore everyone to death.
> All I wanted to know is if your 'observations' about Apache working
> with dual processors are JUST for IBMHTTPD or have you seen
> standard Apache work 'out of the b
Sorry for the delays... i've located the revs of the makefiles that need
to be retagged --- but have a denfull of scouts and a food drive today...
I should be here by 3pm cst to wrap up the retag of 2.0.14
OKay, SpeakEasy is an awesome ISP. Just after sending this message, I
checked my e-mail, and found my new IP address, and all the rest of the
relevant information, so I am back up and running on DSL. As soon as Will
re-tags the Windows files, I'll roll the new tarball, and release 2.0.14
as an
I know I said I would release the alpha's today, but my net access is
spotty at best right now. Unfortunately, my DSL provider chose this
weekend to go bankrupt, and my new DSL provider hasn't completed the
switch over yet. :-(
So, I have one computer that can connect to the internet, because
In a message dated 01-03-10 09:41:29 EST, Bill Stoddard writes...
> a message dated 01-03-09 13:48:46 EST, Bill wrote...
> >
> > > No, not untested. We do this all the time with IBM HTTP Server (which
> is
> > > a -very- close derivitave of Apache)
> > >
> > > Bill
> >
> > Kevin Kile
>
> In a message dated 01-03-09 13:48:46 EST, Bill writes...
>
> > No, not untested. We do this all the time with IBM HTTP Server (which
is
> > a -very- close derivitave of Apache)
> >
> > Bill
>
> Is the special IBM rewrite of BUFF.H and BUFF.C what makes
> it work? I've always wondered why t
16 matches
Mail list logo
