httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ralf S. Engelschall" <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache-1.3/src/os/unix Makefile.tmpl
Date Sun, 10 May 1998 16:28:20 GMT

In article <> you wrote:
> On 10 May 1998 wrote:

>> rse         98/05/10 06:04:38
>>   Modified:    .        Makefile.tmpl
>>                src      CHANGES Configure Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/ap   Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/main Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/modules/example .cvsignore Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/modules/experimental .cvsignore Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/modules/extra .cvsignore Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/modules/proxy .cvsignore Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/modules/standard .cvsignore Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/modules/test .cvsignore Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/os/bs2000 Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/os/emx Makefile.tmpl
>>                src/os/unix Makefile.tmpl
>>   Log:
>>   The second part of the consistency cleanups for the Makefiles.
>>   Now we are clean enough for a release... ;-)

> Either that or we are now broken enough for a release.

> I'm not sure why right before a release is the best time for 
> "cleanups" that may introduce portability problems, etc.

Yes, you are right, it's a little bit too critical time. OTOH when should
cleanups be done?  Hmmm... not easy to answer if one wants to give a really
good answer because while in the middle of group hacking is also not a good
time. I'm also not very happy that the number of touched files is such large.
I just wanted to cleanup some ugly parts which could lead to confusion and
perhaps problems and only looked that the change volume is small (which it
is!). I realized only at the end that I'd to touch a little bit more files I
wanted to touch. 

Sorry for this. It was not my intend to touch such large number of files or
break anything at the last minute. But OTOH most of the files are .cvsignore
where I just added the *.lo/*.so pairs...  Let us hope I've not broken
something although I've already tested the stuff under FreeBSD, Linux and
Solaris before comitting. If I've broken something, sorry. Next time I'll try
to have more awareness for the number of touched files. Nevertheless thanks
for disabusing me. It was not the best time, I know...

                                       Ralf S. Engelschall

View raw message