httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@gonzo.ben.algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: Configur{e,ation} changes
Date Mon, 09 Sep 1996 05:59:27 GMT
Alexei Kosut wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
> > > Though, as I've pointed out before, having all these little divisions
> > > can make Configuration large and unweidly. I'd rather use
> > > autoconf, with partial (or no) OS-based selection. But I think I've
> > > said that before.
> > > 
> > 
> > For the number of OSs that we need to handle, it's easy to either
> > fold the OS-guessing routine into Configure or, better yet, create
> > a Configure.guess routine. After all, it's simply a large case-switch
> > around the return values of uname.
> 
> Why is it I get the impression that if the time and energy invested
> into this ongoing "discussion" - about six months worth of it - had
> been instead put into coding, we could have rewritten autoconf from
> scratch by now, and maybe a C compiler or two on the side?
> 
> I uploaded a few weeks ago a set of scripts (generated by autoconf)
> that do exactly what you just said. You didn't seem to like them; I
> never did quite figure out why.

As I understand it, he didn't like them because you get a pile of other clagger
as well as what we want, namely the platform guessing bit. For some reason that
I don't understand, you seem to object to us crafting our own platform guesser.

I don't actually care much which way we solve the problem - except that I do
think that our own platform guesser would be cleaner, and perhaps a little more
maintainable. We also avoid any licensing issues.

But, either way, I do agree that a platform guesser is needed.

Cheers,

Ben.

> 
> > For now, I think having the person at least need to edit Configure to
> > select their OS is minimal stuff.
> 
> Individually, having to select a OS is minimal. Having to select an OS
> from a large list (more than 20 - i.e. it becomes necessary to page)
> is not minimal, since it will confuse the average user. Heck, it
> confuses me. I just want to type configure and make and have it work. If
> I want to use optional modules, yeah, I guess I have to go back and
> edit things (I really would like to see working dld implementations for
> 2.0, though), but I'd like a basic web server without it.
> 
> Back when we first released 1.1.0, I took a look at the stats of the
> downloaded after a couple days - about 60% of the downloads were of
> the pre-compiled binaries. If that goes to show anything about the
> "average" user of Apache (actually, I tend to download pre-compiled
> binaries of software where available, too. I makes life easier. But I
> guess that's what this is all about).
> 
> Anyhow, I think we've been through this before.
> 
> -- 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>      The Apache HTTP Server
> URL: http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/   http://www.apache.org/
> 

-- 
Ben Laurie                  Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435
Freelance Consultant and    Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472
Technical Director          Email: ben@algroup.co.uk
A.L. Digital Ltd,           URL: http://www.algroup.co.uk
London, England.            Apache Group member (http://www.apache.org)

Mime
View raw message