httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <>
Subject Re: apache/linux modules
Date Mon, 02 Feb 1998 21:32:25 GMT
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Cristian Gafton wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> > I hate software like that because it is a royal pain to keep track of
> > exactly how something is complied.
> Autoconf will create for you a configure.log file
> whcih will give you exactly that information. Which resembles remarkably
> well with the current way of keeping track how things were compiled (which
> is basically looking into the Configuration _and_ httpd.h files)

It generates the log, but that isn't automaticaly and directly applied to
the next time you run it.

> > If I can't go back and do the same
> > thing I did before and get the same result, it is useless. 
> I am not sure what you mean by that.

It just means I'm lazy and don't like typing anything more than
"./Configure ; make" to preserve any and all options that I used before.
I can do that now.

> > A http_paths.h file or something that you could append any paths you want
> > to be non-default would be useful (ie. distributed empty) and would make
> > life easier in that respect, but it doesn't do everything.
> You have to know that sometimes maintaining packages with patches is a
> royal pain when the source changes and you have to port a
> distribution-specific patch to the new code base. Yes, I am being selfish,
> but somtimes is just cool to have a script or something with the command
> line that will build apache for you without having to fiddle with
> paches...

cat <<EOF > http_paths.h	# no this doesn't work, but it could...
#define HTTPD_ROOT "/foobar"
#define DOCUMENT_LOCATION "/dev/cooltree"

No, that doesn't solve the modules thing.  If you only want to add
modules, it would be possible to have something similar happen with
something that is added to the Configuration file.  

> > Oh yea, while are are at it... _WHY_ are there so many reports of the
> > RedHat RPM of Apache 1.2.x not giving text/html to .htm files?  The base
> > version should...
> Somehow a wrong /etc/mime.types file gets installed on that systems, and
> .htm is not defined as being text/html type in that file. We are tracking
> this thig down...
> Best wishes,
> Cristian
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Cristian Gafton   --   --   Red Hat Software, Inc.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  UNIX is user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.

View raw message