httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Sutton <>
Subject Re: apachen - 3rd-party modules
Date Tue, 12 Aug 1997 22:14:12 GMT
On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Alexei Kosut wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> >     I don't see any other way of doing it, short of an immense effort on
> >     the part of Configure or its ilk to figure out the dependencies -
> >     and even that couldn't work on a multi-source module like the proxy.
> Okay, then. -1 on the whole source re-org until we can figure out a way
> to let the one-file modules that we've been using since 0.8 work with
> 1.3. I'm not going to let us require that every module author create their own
> Makefile for a dinky little ten-line module. Especially since it would
> mean that we'd have to explain to all our users how to use their modules
> that work with 1.0 and 1.1 and 1.2 (and will still compile just fine with
> 1.3), and explain how to create a Makefile. Doesn't sounds like a good
> idea to me.

The procedure for single-file source modules should be:

 1  Drop the module in modules/extra
 2  Add the following to Configuration
     AddModule modules/extra/mod_foo
 3  Do ./Configure
 4  Do make
This is exactly the same procedure as at present, but with slight
difference in item 1 and 2. Note that even the text you add to
Configuration is simpler: you do not need to delve into the C code to find
the module structure name. 

This just requires amodules/extra directory with a *blank* Makefile.tmpl
in it.

> The whole idea of the source reorg is to have things make more sense,
> and work better, not the other way around.

But surely it does make more sense to separate modules from apache core
code, and to separate extra 3-party modules from the standard ones. For
example, when compiling a new release uses can simpy copy their
modules/extra dir into modules/extra in the new release, fiddle with
Configuration and go. 

I'm not conviunced that single-source-code modules are the best idea
anyway. They really should come with documentation, change logs, etc. The
new Configure makes it *very* easy to create and distrbute modules which
use their own install direcory under modules (e.g. modules/foo for
mod_foo). Since we are talking about thirdy-aprty software here it makes
sense for it to reside outside of the apache source directory, where it
can be easily identified and updated as and when necessary.

> Oh, and I think the whole way the apachen Makefiles work may need to be
> rewritten. For example: if I change a file besides a regex sourece file
> or modules.c, and recompile, the object file gets recompiled, but the
> httpd binary does not, because make thinks its "up to date". -1 also
> until that gets fixed.

Yes, it is a bug. 


View raw message