Philip M. Gollucci wrote: > Geoffrey Young wrote: > >> >> I thought so to, but it looks like we had test cases for 2.1 and greater, >> and 2.0.X. the 2.1 cases were removed because > 2.1 was finally brought >> into sync with 2.0.X. >> >> in other words, I don't think your change did anything. >> >> on the other hand, chris is getting 2.1-type numbers. this is how it >> used >> to look, for example >> >> - my $cl = have_min_apache_version(2.1) ? 25 : 0; >> - my $head_cl = have_min_apache_version(2.1) ? $cl : undef; >> >> so chris is getting 25 instead of 0 and undef, which is how 2.1 used to >> report back things. I can't recall a single failure of this test that >> wasn't 2.1-specific... > > Agreed, yeah, I was kind of confused. > >> >> I'm starting to think that ubuntu is taking some major liberties with >> it's >> distribution, but who knows. >
It's official. The 2.0.53 apache2 install in Ubuntu has been molested somehow. I downloaded 2.0.53 and 2.0.54 from apache.org, compiled them, installed them into my home directory, and reran mod_perl 2.0.2-dev against both. All tests pass. I'm in the mood to send a nastygram to whoever's doing that package, but I wouldn't know what to say. -=Chris --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
