Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 43809 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jun 2000 22:00:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 43798 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 22:00:49 -0000 From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." To: Subject: RE: Apache 2.0a4? Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:58:43 -0500 Message-ID: <000101bfcf39$85256850$345985d0@corecomm.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N No... definately not! Every -bundled- source remained constant. There is no code change, ergo no a5 :-) Bill > -----Original Message----- > From: Ask Bjoern Hansen [mailto:ask@valueclick.com] > Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 3:49 PM > To: William A. Rowe, Jr. > Cc: new-httpd@apache.org > Subject: RE: Apache 2.0a4? > > > On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > > OMLMG... gz did do something (bad). > > > > I was trying to build a monolithic .gz file. Guess I failed > > horribly. > > yuck. > > > Here's fix, would it be possible to pull those .gz files (.mak.gz) > > and add in the proper replacement? So sorry! > > Done. New files are at http://dev.apache.org/dist/ - I don't > think it's > worth doing an a5 for. > > > - ask > > -- > ask bjoern hansen - > more than 70M impressions per day, >