httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: C99 bump prior to apr 2.0?
Date Wed, 03 Sep 2014 22:49:23 GMT
The 1.5 apr-util (and apr) branches are actively maintained.  You have forward binary compatibility
since 1.0 used in the early 2.1-dev days.  Because 1.4.x was not receiving attention (and
was missing new API's used for httpd-2.4) the project determined it would bundle 1.5 rather
than the now-stale 1.4 apr project releases.

So in terms of hitting a maintenance branch, 1.5 is now exactly that, and the patch that broke
C89 compilers was for maintenance, to clean up the errors present on P64 and LP64 architectures.

"Wang, Andy" <awang@ptc.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 09:27 -0700, wrowe@rowe-clan.net wrote:
>> Finally returned to VC6, having replaced my older svn on Windows
>> which would no longer handshake with svn.apache.org and bumped into
>> a single issue.
>>  
>> Building VC6 binaries for win32, I was bitten by r1508904 which
>> introduces
>> a C99 type prior to releasing apr 2.0 (probably not a good idea to
>> make
>> such changes in a maintenance branch).
>
>I don't mean to tangent this discussion too much but I'm curious.
> 
>So this change back in 2.2.26(?) was what finally made me start to use
>visual studio 2010 for our windows builds (and boy is that an ugly
>mess).
>
>Is there a reason why you're sticking with VC6 to build?
>
>I was surprised that this change made it into a maintenance branch, but
>honestly was looking for something to push me to building on VC2010.
>
>Thanks,
>Andy
Mime
View raw message