Re: Volunteer for RMing 2.12?

----- Original Message ----
> From: Joe Schaefer <[email protected]>
> To: Steve Hay <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 6:46:33 AM
> Subject: Re: Volunteer for RMing 2.12?
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> 
> > From: Steve Hay 
> > To: Joe Schaefer ; [email protected]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 4:03:40 AM
> > Subject: RE: Volunteer for RMing 2.12?
> > 
> > Joe Schaefer wrote:
> > > I cut a tarball from trunk that Randy
> > > and company can test out on Win32:
> > > 
> > > http://people.apache.org/~joes/libapreq2-trunk.tar.gz
> > > 
> > > Assuming it gets tested and generally agreed
> > > to be worth releasing, is anyone willing to
> > > do the honors and volunteer for RM duties?
> > 
> > Still doesn't build on Win32:
> > 
> > [...]
> > cl.exe /Fo"C:\Temp\LIBAPR~1.12\win32\libs\handle.obj" /nologo /MD /W3
> > /O2 /D "WIN32" /D "NDEBUG" /D "_WINDOWS" /D "_MBCS" /D "_USRDLL" /D
> > "APREQ_DECLARE_EXPORT" /I"C:\apache2.2\include"
> > /I"C:\Temp\LIBAPR~1.12\include" /I"C:\Temp\LIBAPR~1.12\module\apache2"
> > /YX /FD /c C:\Temp\LIBAPR~1.12\module\apache2\handle.c
> > cl : Command line warning D9002 : ignoring unknown option '/YX'
> > handle.c
> > c:\temp\libapreq2-2.12\module\apache2\apreq_module_apache2.h(149) :
> > error C2059: syntax error : '('
> > NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
> > 8\VC\bin\cl.exe"' : return code '0x2'
> > Stop.
> > NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
> > 8\VC\bin\nmake.exe"' : return
> > code '0x2'
> > Stop.
> > 
> > I guess it's tripping up on
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=744417, which I assume
> > was an attempt to do something similar to my hack in
> > http://marc.info/?l=apreq-dev&m=123391925319834&w=2
> 
> Yeah, that looks like the problem this time.  Any idea what those macros
> now expand to on your machine?  (I'm pretty sure the reason your hack
> doesn't work is because of the _stdcall thingy).


Steve, I just uploaded a new tarball (same url) with the latest fix attempt.
Any improvements this time?