> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff Trawick > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 9:51 PM
> Greg Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Jeff Trawick wrote: >>> Has anybody verified that it actually works to not have srclib/apr? >>> It doesn't work for me. >>> Since buildconf is broken without srclib/apr, I first did buildconf >>> then renamed srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util. Configure completed, but >>> the generation of exports.c fails since the makefiles assume that apr >>> and apr-util header files can be found under srclib. >>> Here is what I would recommend: >>> a) Set AC_AUX_DIR like it was historically (assume there is >>> srclib/apr). >>> b) Release 2.0.44 >>> c) Re-integrate into APACHE_2_0_BRANCH Fred's changes to separate >>> from APR, though with the portability fixes this time. >> >> Sounds like a plan. >> >> I'll be happy to change configure.in back, but what do I commit it >> against? 2.0-stable? If so, what's the process (since it doesn't make >> any sense to put it into 2.1 first)? Post patch & ask for votes >> before committing, then make sure Sander knows about it? > > put it in stable if somebody else gives it +1 (I assume that you and I > are +1 for it :) )... I don't think posting the patch is necessary > since we're talking about one line that was mentioned in the first > message in this thread Consider this another +1 so we can move forward :) Sander
