On 12 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED > Resolution|INVALID |
For one thing, can we please change this "INVALID" thing to "MISTAKEN" or something more friendly-sounding? > ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-04-12 16:11 ------- > It's httpd-2.0.35.tar.gz itself which is broken - the files in question have > incorrect timestamps on them (or have not been pre-built prior to building the > distribution): > > bash-2.03$ gtar tzvf httpd-2.0.35.tar.gz | grep ssl_expr_ > -rw-r--r-- rbb/staff 10300 2002-03-13 20:47 > httpd-2.0.35/modules/ssl/ssl_expr_eval.c > -rw-r--r-- rbb/staff 34302 2002-01-10 00:28 > httpd-2.0.35/modules/ssl/ssl_expr_parse.c > -rw-r--r-- rbb/staff 510 2002-01-10 00:28 > httpd-2.0.35/modules/ssl/ssl_expr_parse.h > -rw-r--r-- rbb/staff 6802 2002-03-13 20:47 > httpd-2.0.35/modules/ssl/ssl_expr_parse.y > -rw-r--r-- rbb/staff 49142 2002-03-13 20:47 > httpd-2.0.35/modules/ssl/ssl_expr_scan.c > -rw-r--r-- rbb/staff 6492 2002-03-13 20:47 > httpd-2.0.35/modules/ssl/ssl_expr_scan.l But *DAMN*, he's right: ssl_expr_parse.c 1.6 3 months wrowe This patch eliminated from... ssl_expr_parse.h 1.6 3 months wrowe This patch eliminated from... ssl_expr_parse.y 1.5 4 weeks fielding Update our copyright for this year. ssl_expr_scan.c 1.8 4 weeks fielding Update our copyright for this year. ssl_expr_scan.l 1.5 4 weeks fielding Update our copyright for this year. Ouch. I'll touch the necessary files and recommit them. Does anyone object to having these generated files in the repository? While it causes headaches such as this, I don't see that we have much of a choice given the fact that some of our platforms probably don't have the right tools to generate these files on their own... plus removing them would require changing the tarball building script [not that that's not doable]. --Cliff -------------------------------------------------------------- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlottesville, VA
