Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 16816 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2004 15:10:39 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Aug 2004 15:10:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 40129 invoked by uid 500); 6 Aug 2004 15:10:36 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 40084 invoked by uid 500); 6 Aug 2004 15:10:35 -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 40069 invoked by uid 99); 6 Aug 2004 15:10:35 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: dev@apr.apache.org To: dev@apr.apache.org From: Joe Schaefer Subject: Re: APR_FIND_APR Date: 06 Aug 2004 11:10:23 -0400 Lines: 21 Message-ID: <87hdrgwbds.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com> References: <41137D39.5040803@modperlcookbook.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-34-76-42.mia.bellsouth.net Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Sender: news X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Geoffrey Young writes: > I hesitate to raise the issue again, since it looks like this was a > passionate subject before, but is it possible to roll up APR_FIND_APR > into its own, separate utility script or something? or maybe somebody > else has has a suggestion as to how we can intelligently figure out > which utility function to call? mod_perl-2 should be getting the ap[ru] config script's name/location from httpd (ie apxs). Like apreq, modperl's apr ABI is subordinate to httpd, so asking apxs for the name of the ap[ru] script it used is IMO the safest solution. > it seems pretty strange to have embedded the version in > the utility scripts rather than just adding a new --version parameter :) Not strange at all when you consider parallel installs of past 0.9.x and future 1.x.y. -- Joe Schaefer