Re: svn commit: r1622429 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

2014-09-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yeah... I could have *swore* that we allowed this before with the scoreboard, but can't for the life of me find it... Must be dusty neurons. Agreed that it breaks ABI to change the struct. :/ On Sep 4, 2014, at 3:44 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote: No... only if the patch is

AW: svn commit: r1622429 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS

2014-09-05 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , Vodafone Group
All the changes we did regarding the sizes date back before branching 2.4.x Regards Rüdiger -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 5. September 2014 12:20 An: dev@httpd.apache.org Betreff: Re: svn commit: r1622429 -

RE: Re: C99 bump prior to apr 2.0?

2014-09-05 Thread wrowe
- Original Message - Subject: Re: C99 bump prior to apr 2.0? From: Gregg Smith g...@gknw.net Date: 9/4/14 12:47 pm To: dev@httpd.apache.org On 9/4/2014 8:49 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: I overlooked 2 other viable options [ ] Roll -win32-src-r2.zip with apr-util 1.5.2

Re: Re: C99 bump prior to apr 2.0?

2014-09-05 Thread Jeff Trawick
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 2:01 PM, wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote: - Original Message - Subject: Re: C99 bump prior to apr 2.0? From: Gregg Smith g...@gknw.net Date: 9/4/14 12:47 pm To: dev@httpd.apache.org On 9/4/2014 8:49 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: I overlooked 2 other