Torsten Foertsch wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 January 2005 15:28, Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
>>>- modperl_handler_t *handler;
>>>+ modperl_handler_t *handler=0;
>>
>>hmm, what's that about?
>
>
> It cures this warning:
> IncludeHook.xs: In function `handle_perl':
> IncludeHook.xs:49: warning: `ha
On Wednesday 26 January 2005 15:28, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> > - modperl_handler_t *handler;
> > + modperl_handler_t *handler=0;
>
> hmm, what's that about?
It cures this warning:
IncludeHook.xs: In function `handle_perl':
IncludeHook.xs:49: warning: `handler' might be used uninitialized in thi
Geoffrey Young wrote:
> for
> example, I can't use the same perl for mp1 and mp2 if I want this approach
> to work, since ModPerl::MM::WriteMakefile() will choose the one I installed
> last to build against.
blarg, blarg, blarg. that was supposed to be Apache 2.0 and Apache 2.1, not
mp1 and mp
Torsten Foertsch wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 January 2005 13:42, Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
>>Torsten Foertsch wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>while trying out Apache-IncludeHook-2.00_02
>>
>>I haven't touched that in a while, so if you see it failing to work on
>>newish apache just holler. other than that,
On Wednesday 26 January 2005 13:42, Geoffrey Young wrote:
> Torsten Foertsch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > while trying out Apache-IncludeHook-2.00_02
>
> I haven't touched that in a while, so if you see it failing to work on
> newish apache just holler. other than that, I hope you like it :)
Yes, since
Torsten Foertsch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while trying out Apache-IncludeHook-2.00_02
I haven't touched that in a while, so if you see it failing to work on
newish apache just holler. other than that, I hope you like it :)
> I stumbled across the lack of
> Apache::Test::have().
hmm... is have() rea
