httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: apache/linux modules
Date Tue, 03 Feb 1998 02:20:24 GMT
Cristian Gafton wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > Oh. I see. I need to edit a file to make configure/autconf know that.
> > Yep. That saves a lot of work. No more hand editing files with
> > autoconf, unless you need to hand edit a file to make it work
> > with your setup. Yep. That's a time saver :) :) :)
> This turns into a religiuos war. You defend your point at any price, no
> matter what, aren't you ?

I said right up front that it was religious :) :)

As mentioned in another post, by prejudice against autoconf was created
by the hassles I had to deal with over years on a platform and setup
that wasn't plain vanilla. Almost without fail, ./configure would
only be the first step in the build process... I would have to let
it run, then figure out what files it created, and then hand-edit
those files as required. I would then need to make sure that config.h
didn't make assumptions that weren't valid (ie: like the call structure
of setpgrp(), which varies between SYSV and BSD [autoconf might be fixed
with regards to this now]) and other such things. In a nutshell,
./configure always seemed to say "Don't worry, I know best" and
make porting/building programs a major hassle because no matter what,
it very often (1) didn't know best and (2) pretended to be a lot
smarter than it really was.

Old habits, and old prejudices are hard to change. IMO a small,
home-brewed "Configure" that does exactly what we want and nothing
more or nothing less is in the spirit of Apache. Sometimes, all you
want is the 3/4" hex socket and the 1/2" star socket and not the whole
freakin' set, with screw drivers included :) :)

      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services           |
            "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

View raw message