Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > On 05/31/2009 01:15 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >> FYI - As soon as I see one more committer ack the 1.3 release, I will >> move ahead with tagging an 0.9; I just figured it wasn't worth doing >> if things were out of sorts. >> >> If anyone wants to address any 'make check' flaw there, first, that >> would be terrific. I doubt we'll see another 0.9 release after this. > > The 'make check' errors do not occur with 0.9 as we have neither dbd > nor dbm drivers in 0.9.
Then we simply need to validate that the poll issues also do not occur (I doubt they do) and apr[-util]-0.9 looks ready to rock n roll.
