On 14 November 2013 14:42, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:03 AM, STF wrote:
>
>> Ah OK. Well, even without the Force of Jedi, I can already foresee a
>> difficult path before me if I'm to compile my own binary for Windows ...
>>
>> Most of
OK, thank you, even though I'm not sure where Apache lounge was
*aforementionned* in this thread. But from the "about" of its web site,
it's stated that "ApacheLounge.com is not affiliated with, or endorsed by,
the Apache Software Foundation." Hope someone has audited its compiled
binaries to ma
upport for Windows officially dead?
On 13 November 2013 15:59, Eric Covener wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:41 AM, STF wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've found back this old thread about binary for Windows. But I don't
> still
> > quite understand the o
Hi,
I've found back this old thread about binary for Windows. But I don't
still quite understand the official position for Windows, if there's
any... I suppose official Windows binary for 2.4 will not be provided.
OK, no problem. That means we have to compile our own binary. But I can't
find t
