httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lars Eilebrecht <Lars.Eilebre...@unix-ag.org>
Subject RE: cvs commit: apache-1.3 STATUS
Date Wed, 10 Jun 1998 16:42:34 GMT
According to rse@hyperreal.org:

>     Open issues:
>     
>    +    * How should an Apache binary release tarball look?
>    +
>    +      1. The "old" way where it is just a source release tarball
>    +         plus a pre-compiled src/httpd-<gnutriple>. It is created
>    +         via the apache-devsite/binbuild.sh script which
>    +         - creates the build tree
>    +         - creates the src/Configuration file with standard modules
>    +         - runs "make"
>    +         - renames src/httpd to src/httpd-<gnutriple>
>    +         - runs "make clean"
>    +         - packs the build tree stuff together
>    +         Already known discussion points:
>    +         - should src/httpd be renamed or now because a lot
>    +           of PRs say they cannot find the httpd :-(
>    +         Pros: <gets filled tomorrow>
>    +         Cons: <gets filled tomorrow>
>    +         Status: Ralf -0
>    +
>    +      2. The way other projects release binary tarballs, i.e.
>    +         a package containing the installed (binary) files.
>    +         It can be created by a script which
>    +         - creates the build tree
>    +         - runs "./configure --prefix=/usr/local/apache \
                                           ^^^
>    +                             --enable-shared=remain \
>    +                             --disable-module=auth_db \
>    +                             --enable-suexec ..."
>    +         - runs "make install root=apache-root"
>    +         - packs the stuff together from ./apache-root only!!
>    +         Already known discussion points:
>    +         - should there be a prefix usr/local/apache in 
                                         ^^^
Are you talking about "usr/local/apache" or "/usr/local/apache"?

>    +           the tarball or not because some people think
>    +           its useful while others dislike it a lot.
>    +         Pros: <gets filled tomorrow>
>    +         Cons: <gets filled tomorrow>
>    +         Status: Ralf +1, Martin +1
>    +

Maybe it would be a good idea to move the httpd binary out of the src directory
into a bin or sbin directory. Some people are to stupid to guess that there
is a binary in the src directory.


ciao...
-- 
Lars Eilebrecht                          - There's always one more bug.
sfx@unix-ag.org
http://www.home.unix-ag.org/sfx/


Mime
View raw message