On Sep 5, 2015 10:14 AM, "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 27.08.2015 05:46, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > > Several years ago, we combined the functionality of apr and apr-util, > > and that library no longer draws in sub-dependencies until specific > > components are necessary (dbm providers, dbd providers, crypto > > providers etc). > > > > It seems overtime that we produce a release based on that effort, I'm > > offering in absence of other volunteers to prepare an -alpha candidate > > in mid-September. > > > > We don't work on the same clock as downstream distributors, so > > whatever effort we make in Sept won't see broad distribution until > > 2016. But if the httpd, svn and other consumers have successfully > > integrated with the 2.0 trunk/ development effort, it seems like this > > is a good time to begin to make that happen. > > > > Thoughts/comments/roadblocks/showstoppers? > > I've been trying to test APR trunk on the latest and greatest OSX beta. > Quite a few weird results ... > > For starters, the HAVE_FDATASYNC symbols is defined in > arch/unix/apr_private.h, even though there's no such function on OSX. > The compiler does warn about the missing prototype for fdatasync(), but > AC_TEST_FUNCS doesn't seem to care about that ... > > The result is a number of test failures (some of which seem to be test > suite bugs) and crashes in the tests. > > I'll invesigate further.
Please do. I jumped to a pure bleed environment of httpd dependencies two weeks ago and was offer oh so many surprises. I don't know if I will be happy with our cmake environment by end of week, but the official cmake FAQ doesn't offer a lot of hope. (This going to the rel vs abs path debate... So disappointed when any tool author falls on the one-true-path sword... Sigh )
