Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 6769 invoked by uid 6000); 2 Mar 1998 18:07:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 6754 invoked from network); 2 Mar 1998 18:07:42 -0000 Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (204.62.130.91) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 2 Mar 1998 18:07:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 17610 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 1998 18:07:45 -0000 Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 10:07:45 -0800 (PST) From: Dean Gaudet To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: regardless... ralf's autoconf path has use In-Reply-To: <199803021802.TAA19017@en1.engelschall.com> Message-ID: X-Comment: Visit http://www.arctic.org/~dgaudet/legal for information regarding copyright and disclaimer. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org I am very much in favour of this... heck it's something that even I get annoyed by when I set up a new system with apache. I always make $prefix/bin and stuff the tools in there... previously I stuffed my own control script, but now I'm using apachectl. I always end up needing htpasswd or dbmmanage... Dean On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: > > In article you wrote: > > > I didn't follow the entire thread. But there's an open PR asking that the > > "make install" rule build and install a bunch of the support tools as > > well. And I think this is a useful thing. It looked like Ralf did this > > in his patch. > > Yes, all important support tools are installed, too. _Even_ with correct Perl > interpreter path inserted for Perl scripts like dbmmanage and correct Apache > paths inserted in scripts like apachectl. And of course it automatically > adjusts the *.conf files according to the used paths. > > As I said, after "make install" you immediately can try out Apache by running > `/sbin/apachectl start'. This what users want: A out-of-the-box build > and installation where no manual editing is needed on the one hand and the > ability to be able to specifiy non-standard thinks (like compiled-in modules, > used Rules, CC, CFLAGS, etc.). > > Of course, I understand and accept that my configure stuff is considered a new > feature (even if it doesn't patch or hurt existing stuff) and that it's a > little bit late. But as Dean wanted to state here, first the users really > wanted it in the past and second it _is_ also what the hackers expect... > > Greetings, > Ralf S. Engelschall > rse@engelschall.com > www.engelschall.com >