> ah, now it's clear. it's implemented in 2.0.47, right? > Hmm, 2.0.47 was released a year ago. Do you think we may be should just > drop 2.0.46? I wonder how many 2.0.46 users are out there. Poll the list?
I'm for dropping back to 2.0.47 outright in the next release. IIRC libapreq requires at least 2.0.47 so we're not alone. poll the user list (not the dev list ;) and you'll get 1001 different opinions :) > > If not we need to add the C compat layer object to the APR.so linking, > which shouldn't be too hard to do. sure, if we don't solve it via 2.0.47. --Geoff --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
