httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@engelschall.com (Ralf S. Engelschall)
Subject Re: [CONTRIB] Autoconf Interface Emulation
Date Mon, 02 Mar 1998 07:11:06 GMT

In article <199803012145.QAA29887@devsys.jaguNET.com> you wrote:
> Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
>> 
>> So, I personally think it should be _either_ taken in _immediately before
>> 1.3.X_ (including 1.3.0) or forget completely as part of the official
>> distribution (Of course, I personally won't move it /dev/null, I then will
>> release it separately). Because its _only_ for 1.3 and hence should be in the
>> release _from the first step_ or never in list of 1.3 releases.  Then not even
>> in 1.3.1 or 1.3.2, because I think this doesn't make sense to incorporate it
>> later.

> I would prefer such a drastic user-level change and/or addition not
> be done so close to a possible 1.3.0 release. If we do incorporate this
> then we have either 2 configuration modes

We _already_ have two: The src/Configuration+src/Configure for building and
configuring the source and the Makefile+src/helpers/InstallApache for
configuring and installing the stuff. And the latter one already calls
src/Configur* as my stuff does. So I think this argument is a little bit
bogus. I accept that it is not good and leads to confusion to provide more
then one interface. Fine, then please let us remove
Makefile+src/helpers/InstallApache or at least let us clean this up.

> , which is bound to cause
> confusion, or else we "hide" the Configure method by this configure
> wrapper (ie: we depcreciate the use of Configure). 

No, we can say in the INSTALL file that the user can use the top-level
configure+Makefile.tmpl to build a standard Apache package and install it in a
GNU-conforming way while the src/Configur* stuff remains for custom Builds
(any only builds, because this stuff never installs anything).  So what I
don't understand at this discussion is that you are talking about _two_
configuration mechanims. This is not the case, I think.  We currently have
_one_ source configuration mechanism (src/Configur*) and _one_ installation
configuration mechanism (Makefile+src/helpers/InstallApache). What I want is
just replace the latter one with a more flexible one.

On the other hand: Are you really sure the users use the current
Makefile+src/helpers/InstallApache? It is not even documented on how to use
it. The users had to discover themself to edit Makefile and then create
src/Configuration by hand and then flip back and run this Makefile. Both not
documented and ugly, I think. So I really think 95% of all Apache users either
use a pre-compiled package for their OS or build Apache with src/Configur* and
then install Apache _manually_!

> I am not
> comfortable with either solution at this stage. The reason for
> the later is simply because it is assumed that Configuration
> totally defines how Apache is built (maybe some external modules
> depend on this), and the configure method negates that.

You can control every variable in src/Configuration through my configure
script. Every! You can even use the Autoconf-style way of specifying the
compiler and flags:

  $ CC=pgcc CFLAGS=-O6 ./configure --prefix ....

Hmmm... I would really be happy if some of us at least try it out once.
Because I was sure there will be votes against it, but I didn't expected to
cause this issue such confusion among us....

                                       Ralf S. Engelschall
                                       rse@engelschall.com
                                       www.engelschall.com

Mime
View raw message