httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gregg L. Smith" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] httpd 2.2.13 candidate
Date Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:32:31 GMT
Well, on any day I would normally say "ok, it's this quirky machine,"
but not on this. This happened to someone else as well. Both on VC6 and 9.

Modern cmd.exe shells? XP SP3 or is it Vista? This is XP SP2 I am using.

I've thought some on it as well since and I can think of possibly a
better approach, but I'm very green. I'm looking at it now, that is much 
cleaner. I just learned a little more about make files, thanks.

I will give it a whirl here a little later and see how it goes or 
doesn't go.


William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Gregg L. Smith wrote:
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>>>   +/-1
>>>>   [+1]  Release httpd-2.2.13 as GA
>>> This is looking fine on windows, is up at /dev/dist as -src-win32,
>>> and binaries will follow in the morning.
>> non-binding +9/10 on Windows. Please see PR 47659 for the last 1/10.
>> This is only a build process failure due to a small oversight in the
>> makefile.
> I offered an alternative solution (one based on too many /bin/sh for
> loops :-) Could you test 2.2 branch or even just apr-util/1.3.x branch
> so we have this right in the next release?
> I'm still puzzled, since my modern cmd.exe shells never complain about
> empty for %x in () do loops.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - 
> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.49/2295 - Release Date: 08/10/09 18:19:00

View raw message