httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe+gm...@sunstarsys.com>
Subject Re: [apreq-2] does not use apr-config --includes
Date Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:19:05 GMT
Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org> writes:

[...]

> 2.0.46 is confirmed to have these:
> 
> /home/stas/httpd/prefork-2.0.46/build> grep BINDIR *
> config_vars.mk:APR_BINDIR = /home/stas/httpd/prefork-2.0.46/bin
> config_vars.mk:APU_BINDIR = /home/stas/httpd/prefork-2.0.46/bin
> 
> So I guess we are all set.
> 
> However we need to make the requirement coded in ./configure (and
> Makefile.PL?), it'd be a waste for people to report failures, if the
> sw can tell them that 2.0.46 is required when they use an older httpd. 
> Since everything goes through ./configure, it's probably the best
> place to set the minimal requirement.

+1.

> Also doesn't apreq now depend on the recent changes in apr-tables? or
> can it work with older apr as well? I haven't tested that.

No.  They took the httpd optimizations and left out the stuff we 
needed.  It's no fun in playing with the httpd gang, especially 
when you're trying to address 7 years of collective apathy toward 
the table API.

The safest thing to do now would be to dump apr_tables and go back 
to apreq_tables, which I don't want to do.  The next safest 
thing would be to override more of the APR::Table API, mainly to 
disable merge() and provide a safe wrapper for set().

-- 
Joe Schaefer


Mime
View raw message