httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@engelschall.com (Ralf S. Engelschall)
Subject Re: modules to include in binary releases
Date Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:24:27 GMT

In article <Pine.BSF.3.95.970817231926.27023a-100000@alive.znep.com> you wrote:

> Let's make an attempt to standardize what modules should be compiled into
> binary releases.  My suggestions follow.
> I have changed my tune, and now think that all reasonable modules should
> be included.
> point: if someone really cared about performance, they would compile
> their own server.
> point: if someone isn't able to compile their own server, they will
> be mighty lost if a module they want isn't included.
> Traditionally this has not been how things are done.  Anyone want 
> to agree with me, or have I gone crazy?

No, its useful, so +1 from me for building the binaries
with the above set of modules.

> Obviously, which *db* modules are included depends on the platform.

How is this decided? Manually by testing or through knowledge?

> Or do we want two binaries; a basic and a full featured.  That is nearly
> zero extra work for me, since I will be building them all by script
> anyway.

No, two binaries are really confusing, as Dean already said.  One binary
distibution per platform is enough. Because those who have a need for a
different binary are those who have a need for other things, too.  And so they
build their own binary anyway...

> [...]
                                       Ralf S. Engelschall
                                       rse@engelschall.com
                                       www.engelschall.com

Mime
View raw message