httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Sutton <p...@ukweb.com>
Subject Re: Signatures, and sealing wax, and..
Date Tue, 12 Aug 1997 22:26:04 GMT
On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> At 05:58 AM 8/12/97 -0400, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> >    1. Binaries should be built with the vanilla Configuration (i.e.,
> >       no additional modules).  Possible exceptions: mod_status and
> >       mod_info?
> 
> Those two, plus dbm_auth, anon_auth, expires, headers, and setenvif.  The
> last one in particular since we have to provide lines to make sure broken
> browsers still work.

setenvif is already a default - it provides BrowserMatch which is a
required directory. It is also damn useful for other things even if I do
say so myself.

This soulds like a good set of modules (although I'm not so sure about
anon_auth - is it widely used?). 

I am a bit worried about auth_dbm though - it'll be linked to whatever dbm
lib is available of the build system which may be different from the end
user's (e.g. Linux could be gdbm, ndbm, etc). Which would be confusing if
the user then used dbmmanage with a different dbm format to build
htpasswd.dbm files which don't work.  Unless all these dbm libs build
compatible files and I'm worrying any mothing. 

> Should we recommend a level of optimization used?  I.e. if gcc, use -O2?

+1.

//pcs



Mime
View raw message