httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Kosut <>
Subject Re: Patches patched... or something
Date Fri, 01 Mar 1996 16:21:53 GMT
On Fri, 1 Mar 1996, Aram Mirzadeh wrote:

> TIMEOUT! I thought the whole point of going to cvs was that people could
> do the patches... now if it doesn't work for your system, patch the patch!!! 
> What's the point of not patching it?  So someone else can guess what
> your system has, and doesn't have?  ( Sorry I don't mean to be rude or 
> anything, but COMEON!)

Sure. People. But people isn't me. And I refuse to patch a patch to Apache
that makes it not compile on my system, and probably dozens of others.
(HP-UX doesn't have <paths.h>, SunOS doesn't have <paths.h>. BSDI and
Linux do, but at that's only half the systems I have access to.) If you
want to patch it, or get someone else to patch it, be my guest. But I'll
just have to remove the line and then the patch will be useless. 

CVS is not a replacement for common sense. If you *know* a patch (and the
patch is four lines long, I don't think waiting will kill it) is going to
break Apache for hundreds of people, I don't see the point.


And as for the log_ignore_cmd patch, there's still, as far as I know, 
Brian's outstanding admonation against including the feature, regardless 
of the patch itself. And the guidlines posted by Paul (yes, I got them) 
say that changes like that should be peer reviewed first. I just didn't 
feel comfortable applying the patch. That's all.

--// Alexei Kosut // <> // Lefler on IRC --//
-----------------// <> -------// 
"To get the full effect of Pat Buchanan's speeches, they should be
read in the original German." //--------------------------------------

View raw message