httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Wheeler <>
Subject Fwd: [Fwd: Re: [proposal/vote] OS X support]
Date Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:47:15 GMT

Stas Bekman asked me to forward this message that I sent to a 
collection of Mac OS X libapreq  users identified by Nat Torkington. 
The upshot is that those of us who use mod_perl on Mac OS X regularly 
*really* want libapreq to support Mac OS X. And it's basically there; 
it seems to work fine on Mac OS X 10.2.2. And Ken Williams and I are 
happy to do test compiles and help out where we can getting the kinks 
out with Mac OS X 10.1.



Begin forwarded message:

> On Friday, December 13, 2002, at 08:45  AM, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>> Stas Bekman writes:
>>> Per our discussion at ApacheCon, here is an example of why we need
>>> various OS gurus. Even though Apache::Request is not mod_perl per
>>> se, it's tightly coupled with it and many mod_perl users rely on
>>> it. Since we don't have in house OSX expertise, we decided to
>>> release a new version without OSX support.
>>> No OS-X user has volunteered to help Joe resolve the problem.
> Actually, that's not entirely true. Ken Williams and I have offered to 
> help out. Just Wednesday I emailed Joe to let him know that I'd 
> successfully built libapreq1.1rc1 on Mac OS X 10.2.2. Ken has been 
> having trouble with Mac OS X 10.1.x., but I think that we'd both be 
> happy to help out where we can. I think I could probably even get a 
> couple of people at Apple to help out, if necessary.
> That said, I'm no C expert. But I've put in a good deal of time 
> figuring out the best approaches to building mod_perl 1.3 on Mac OS X, 
> and have sent in a few patches, and I'm willing to keep it up.
> > Stas, I've CC:ed the big OS X people I can think of: David Wheeler,
>> Morbus Iff, Randal Schwartz, and brian d foy.  There are bits of
>> mod_perl and mod_perl2 that aren't trivial builds on OS X.  Sometimes
>> they need patching, either in code or docs.  Nobody has stepped
>> forward to do this.
> FYI, links to my patches for Apache build stuff:
>> I'd love to see someone be the Go To Guy for OS X and mod_perl
>> questions.  When the libapreq people have a bug reported to them and
>> don't have an OS X box to test it on, they can turn to the Go To Guy
>> (I know, Randal--"Go To Guys considered harmful") for verification and
>> debugging.
> I've compiled mod_perl 1.3.x with apreq 1.0 so many times now that 
> it's old hat. I've somewhat positioned myself as a "go-to guy" by 
> writing articles about it for (I wouldn't be a 
> technical go-to guy; I'd tell people to go-to read my articles.) So 
> anytime that Joe or someone else wants to try out a patched build for 
> Mac OS X, I'm happy to give it a go and report my results. And FWIW, 
> anyone with a SF account can use the Mac OS X compile farm, too.
> Part One of my article is here (part two is due to be published 
> Tuesday):
> I think that it would be a shame to release libapreq1.1 without formal 
> Mac OS X support, because it's so close already! I would actually 
> argue that you could say that it's supported for Mac OS X 10.2. And as 
> for Mac OS X 10.1, again, I think that both Ken and I would be willing 
> to test patches; Ken is helping Chris Nandor with a similar problem 
> with Mac::Carbon right now.
> So just let me know how I can help. I'll make sure that the 
> MacDevCenter articles get updated as necessary.
> Best,
> David

David Wheeler                                     AIM: dwTheory                                 ICQ: 15726394                      Yahoo!: dew7e

View raw message