httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Configure mods
Date Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:27:52 GMT
Dean Gaudet wrote:
> 
> I don't see why we need to print "foobar runs" and then dozens of
> commands... well it wasn't dozens in the simple examples we had before.
> But as soon as you get anything complicated (which db and dbm really are) 
> it's just way overwhelming to print that stuff.  The truth is, the person
> is about to compile the .c file and they're implicitly trusting it ... so
> printing the commands isn't overly useful.

The rationale was that the the stuff between ConfigStart and ConfigEnd
can be any valid shell command(s). The admin might be wary of Configure
but might be lazy in protecting the permissions of the module source
code, allowing for a possible hole.

> So I've got that linux code that figures out if the system has -ldb,
> -ldbm, -lndbm, or -lgdbm.  But doing that automatically just annoys a user
> who might want to specify a library directly.  So I implemented
> "TestCompile func funcname" which tests if with the LIBS setting so far
> can you compile a program containing a reference to funcname.

See my other Email about DBLIST which allows them to specify which
db library(s) to look for and use.
> 
> Then I tweaked the db/dbm things to "TestCompile func dbopen" (dbm_open
> resp.) and not add libraries if it can already compile without them.

Nice.


-- 
====================================================================
      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