At 12:07 PM 3/17/2004, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: >On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 17:53 -0500, Geoffrey Young wrote: >> > >> > Care to +1 for backport & I'll make it so today? >> >> well, I'm not sure that my involvement in apr warrants a vote, but I'm +1 in >> any case :) > >Same argument from me here, this bug has forced me to use libmm in a >project already using APR, and I would _very_ much rather use 100% >APR ;-)
1.20.2.3 +1 -1 apr-util/misc/apr_rmm.c 1.3.2.2 +10 -2 apr-util/test/testrmm.c Sander and company - if the final tags of apr 0.9.5 / httpd 2.0.49 can pick this up - it would be lovely. Well validated. On that subject, any chance of calling 0.9.5 toasted and then using the apr/-util release tag as the httpd 2.0.49 release point? Bill
