possible 2.0.45 binary compatibility concern

[Jeff Trawick]

Are there platforms where DSOs always or sometimes reference libapr.so 
directly?

I just noticed that with 2.0.45's copy of APR we get

  libapr-0.so
  libaprutil-0.so
but with 2.0.44 we get

  libapr.so
  libaprutil.so
as the built versions of apr and apr-util.

If a DSO has a reference to libapr.so (instead of relying on httpd to 
pull in the right apr), it is in for trouble since it either will fail 
to load or it will find an old apr in the loader search path.