On 04/23/2015 11:54 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
warnings in test suite with Sun compiler on Solaris 10, some of which is
from relatively new code (not researched, maybe the API is defined in a way
that this compiler will never be
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/23/2015 09:33 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
Should we add https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32643
from PR 55418?
looks reasonable to me (not tested)
I had tested it with:
+ case $host in
+
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
warnings in test suite with Sun compiler on Solaris 10, some of which is
from relatively new code (not researched, maybe the API is defined in a way
that this compiler will never be happy):
testatomic.c, line 208:
On 04/23/2015 12:09 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/23/2015 09:33 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
Should we add https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32643
from PR 55418?
looks reasonable to me (not tested)
I had tested
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/23/2015 12:09 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
Commited in r1675670 (for 1.5.x).
works fine on S10 circa 2008; I removed my --enable-non-portable-atomics
flag (which would bypass the test) and verified that it still uses them
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
(subject says it all)
+1
On 4/23/2015 5:36 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 04/22/2015 06:28 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
On 4/22/2015 3:19 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
(subject says it all)
Did we ever decide the best way to handle apr_atomic.c on VC 2013+?
PR 57191.
As often as APR is released, it would be nice to get something
On 04/23/2015 09:33 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
(subject says it all)
Should we add https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32643
from PR 55418?
looks reasonable to me (not tested)
Also
On 04/22/2015 06:28 PM, Gregg Smith wrote:
On 4/22/2015 3:19 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
(subject says it all)
Did we ever decide the best way to handle apr_atomic.c on VC 2013+?
PR 57191.
As often as APR is released, it would be nice to get something done
this time around, even if it's not the
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
(subject says it all)
Should we add https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32643
from PR 55418?
Also https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55418#c4 suggests
test suite may be broken for solaris (or is it
The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder apr-trunk-fedora while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/apr-trunk-fedora/builds/108
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: bb-fedora
Build Reason: The
The Buildbot has detected a restored build on builder apr-trunk-fedora while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/apr-trunk-fedora/builds/111
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: bb-fedora
Build Reason: The
12 matches
Mail list logo
