Re: roll some tarballs tomorrow?

2003-10-28 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm planning on rolling 0.9.5 and 1.0-pre1 tarballs tomorrow (Wednesday) unless somebody has strenuous objections. +1 Roll away. -Fitz -- Brian W. Fitzpatrick[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.red-bean.com/fitz/

Re: [VOTE] Time for APR 1.0

2003-09-01 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd like to propose a vote: [X] - Yes, I think we're ready for 1.0 now (in both apr and apr-util) [ ] - No, I think we're not ready for 1.0 because __ -Fitz -- Brian W. Fitzpatrick[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.red-bean.com/fitz/

Re: cvs commit: apr configure.in CHANGES

2003-08-28 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --On Tuesday, August 26, 2003 6:56 AM -0400 Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, that looks reasonable :) I'm still curious about what was happening on Justin's system. No clue, either. =) I very well may have gotten what was

Re: PRNG

2003-05-18 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten) a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID problems in APR. I'm more than happy to do that, it seems like the best way to get the cross-platform support it

Re: cvs commit: apr/include apr_file_io.h

2003-01-25 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: + * @remark The only reason that the apr_file_open_std* functions exist + * is that you may not always have a stderr/out/in on Windows. Huh? I thought the reason these functions exist is that otherwise you'd have no portable way of

Re: atol

2002-07-24 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Wednesday, July 24, 2002, at 09:45 AM, Wilfredo Sanchez wrote: 1- Is adding apr_strtoll kosher? I think so. 2- Should I also add apr_strtoll for completeness? Do you mean apr_atoll? If so, sure. -Fitz

Re: [RANT] our test suite sucks

2002-07-05 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote: The original intent for the test suite was that somebody could run the APR test suite on their implementation of APR, and be sure that they are 100% compatible. The current test suite doesn't even come close to implementing that. In fact, most of the

Re: Building APR

2002-03-05 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Tuesday, March 5, 2002, at 12:46 AM, Jason Filby wrote: Hey all Looks like you must have MSVC++ to build APR on Windows... isn't there some way to build it with MingW (GCC ported to win32) or some other Open Source compiler? I'm pretty sure that you *can*, but I would be a little leery of

Re: NSModule patch to allow non MH_BUNDLE to load...

2002-02-21 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Thursday, February 21, 2002, at 10:06 AM, Pier Fumagalli wrote: Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 11:43:04AM +, Pier Fumagalli wrote: Patch attached for review... Can you please repost as a unified diff? Sure do... Cheeerios! :) Any news on this one? Since

Re: cvs commit: apr/memory/unix apr_pools.c

2002-02-06 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
Ghhh. This may have been the bug -Fitz On Wednesday, February 6, 2002, at 03:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: striker 02/02/06 13:01:36 Modified:memory/unix apr_pools.c Log: Fix a bug where we are NULL'ing too many bytes. Submitted by:

Re: cvs commit: apr/memory/unix apr_pools.c

2002-02-06 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
regularly scheduled commit messages. -Fitz On Wednesday, February 6, 2002, at 04:09 PM, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote: Ghhh. This may have been the bug -Fitz On Wednesday, February 6, 2002, at 03:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: striker 02/02/06 13:01:36

Re: Mixing Apache and Mozilla

2001-02-23 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Friday, February 23, 2001, at 12:05 PM, Jon Smirl wrote: snip What are the advantages to maintaining two libraries doing the same thing with slightly different APIs? Portable run-times are a lot of work, NSPR is 68KB times the number of platforms it works on. Supporting a portable run-times

Re: Mixing Apache and Mozilla

2001-02-23 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Friday, February 23, 2001, at 12:47 PM, Jon Smirl wrote: What platforms does APR work on that NSPR doesn't? NSPR is already on all Windows, Mac, Linux, Solaris, OS/2, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, OSF. There are also some weird platforms that I'm not familar with. BeOS, Unixware, BSDi, Tru64, MacOS X...

Re: shtool invokes head but misses and invokes something else?

2001-02-09 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Wilfredo Sanchez wrote: Anybody recognize that usage output? Certainly looks Apache-ish, but I can't find it in APR. It's a Perl script that's part of LWP: pantheon: ~HEAD -1 Unknown option: 1 Usage: HEAD [-options] url... -m method use method for the request

Re: apr_ function prefixes

2001-02-08 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Thursday, February 8, 2001, at 12:59 AM, Doug MacEachern wrote: On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote: +1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency! i'll drink to that :) Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you used (Or is that the one you sent last

Re: cvs commit: apr buildconf

2001-02-07 Thread B. W. Fitzpatrick
On Wednesday, February 7, 2001, at 04:54 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: -ltpath=`helpers/PrintPath libtoolize` -ltpath=`dirname $ltpath` +libtoolize=`helpers/PrintPath glibtoolize libtoolize` +ltpath=`dirname $libtool` I think you meant ltpath=`dirname $libtoolize` Yup. And I looked that