On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Gregory Szorc <[email protected]> wrote: >> Sure; it might be quicker to use LD_LIBRARY_PATH to run the 1.3.12 >> testall testpoll against apr 1.3.9's libapr before sorting through >> individual commits. > > The instant I read this, I realized my shell likely had LD_LIBRARY_PATH set. > Sure enough, it was. And, it was pointing to a path that had a 1.3.8 APR > shared library. After unsetting LD_LIBRARY_PATH, `testall` found the proper > 1.3.12 library and passed the aforementioned poll tests. > > I suppose testall could be compiled to reference libapr-1.so.x.y.z instead > of libapr-1.so to minimize the possibility of this. But, a bad environment > is a bad environment. > > Sorry for the fire drill. I'll try not to be so careless next time.
OTOH, apr releases tend to be a bit boring.
