On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Joe Orton jor...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 10:50:48AM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
I've no strong objection to this but it deserves a comment in the code
describing why that apr_pool_clear call is redundant; a thorough
^NOT redundant
on my list for
Response as requested ;)
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 06:16:14PM -, William Rowe wrote:
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/STATUS Tue Oct 5 18:16:14 2010
@@ -177,11 +177,14 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
PR: 43857
Trunk
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 10:50:48AM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
I've no strong objection to this but it deserves a comment in the code
describing why that apr_pool_clear call is redundant; a thorough
^NOT redundant
