Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 57853 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2004 14:20:27 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Feb 2004 14:20:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 25674 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2004 14:20:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 25637 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2004 14:20:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 25622 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2004 14:20:21 -0000 Message-ID: <403A0BFC.2080304@attglobal.net> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:19:40 -0500 From: Jeff Trawick User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031020 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: updated port of gen-build.py References: <4038B174.3050603@attglobal.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Sascha Schumann wrote: >>Should I assume that this is broken on the same platforms where >>gen-build.py is broken (where a mix of unix and system-specific >>code is used)? > > > The shell script uses similar logic, so I am afraid it might > have similar issues as well. I suppose you refer to this > rule deciding which objects to compile: > > If a particular module (mmap, memory, etc) lacks a > platform-specific subdirectory, fall back to a generic > implementation (which happens to be unix all the time). > Compile all *.c files found in the selected subdirectory. yep actually, this issue seems to have been implemented in CVS very recently (blush!) configure.in log shows: Sat Feb 21 00:31:48 2004 UTC (2 days, 13 hours ago) by gstein it looks like it builds the different OBJECTS_platform fine and hopefully picks the correct OBJECTS_platform to build so this issue is fixed and shouldn't be a problem for the Python or the non-Python solution; sorry for not keeping up with things :(