httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: apache/linux modules
Date Tue, 03 Feb 1998 01:54:19 GMT
The same is true of our GuessOS and Configure.  If we don't know the
platform we stop dead.  So this isn't an argument against autoconf in any
way. 

Dean

On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Alexei Kosut wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> 
> > If 2.0 is a rewrite (I'm beginning to agree with Roy and Rasmus and
> > whomever else on this one) then starting with autoconf means that for
> > those platforms that we have *active* support we'll still be sure to get
> > it right.  For those platforms that we don't have active support, oh well. 
> > We try our best (autoconf is a really good way to try to support posix
> > platforms you don't have access to).
> 
> But what about platforms the autoconf maintainers don't have access to?
> That's a problem I sometimes have with autoconf.
> 
> I mean, we can use the config.guess stuff to determine an OS name (which
> are actually pretty close to our GuessOS), but last time I looked at
> autoconf, if you do that and come across an OS it doesn't know, autoconf
> basically stops dead in its tracks. And there's nothing that can be done 
> about that without rewriting the way autoconf invokes config.guess
> (e.g., you can't even do "./configure --host=some-unknown-host"
> because it checks that against the known types.) And the config.guess
> maintainers don't seem to be as up-to-date as they possibly should.
> 
> If this has changed since last I looked (about a year ago), then that's
> something...
> 
> -- Alexei Kosut <akosut@stanford.edu> <http://www.stanford.edu/~akosut/>
>    Stanford University, Class of 2001 * Apache <http://www.apache.org> *
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message