httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: Building binaries for 1.2
Date Wed, 04 Jun 1997 21:55:34 GMT
Marc Slemko wrote:
> 
> I think a standard way of doing it is really a good thing...
> 
> Like it or not, people view the binaries as very important because they
> can't type two lines.  A standard config should be made.  All it takes is
> a couple of rules plus a standard Configuration file.

Unless we define "standard" as the default modules plus info and
status then I disagree. Not only that, but the "markets" for each
system is widely different. A "standard" build for Solaris, for
example, might make sense to include extra modules since they
will be used on more powerful machines. Adding these to a build
for NeXT or A/UX make not make sense. I would guess that anyone
who takes the responsibility of making a build for an OS should
also have the responsibility of knowing what the "general market"
would want in those builds.

-- 
====================================================================
      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services
     jim@jaguNET.com           |       http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

Mime
View raw message