You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Greg Ames <gr...@remulak.net> on 2001/11/08 18:17:04 UTC

tag 2.0.28?

I plan to tag 2.0.28 shortly after lunch.  Any reason why I shouldn't?  

Since the 2.0.27 tarballs had build problems on a few platforms (HP-UX,
BSD/OS, maybe Mac OS X), I'd prefer that we test on those platforms
before making new tarballs widely available.  Of course we'd have a
daedalus burn-in period also.

Many thanks to Cliff for handling the BSD/OS make problem.

Greg

Re: tag 2.0.28?

Posted by Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>.

On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Greg Ames wrote:

> I plan to tag 2.0.28 shortly after lunch.  Any reason why I shouldn't?

Not that I know about.

> Since the 2.0.27 tarballs had build problems on a few platforms (HP-UX,
> BSD/OS, maybe Mac OS X), I'd prefer that we test on those platforms
> before making new tarballs widely available.  Of course we'd have a
> daedalus burn-in period also.
>
> Many thanks to Cliff for handling the BSD/OS make problem.

It's still a bit wacky, but at least it's buildable now.

--Cliff

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
   Charlottesville, VA