Message-Id: <199812011823.KAA28616@scv1.apple.com>
To: Apache Group Developer ML <new-httpd@apache.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Configuration (4/4): TARGET name
In-Reply-To: <19981201151444.A25828@engelschall.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 10:22:25 -0800
From: Wilfredo Sanchez <wsanchez@apple.com>
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

| Is it really worth it?

Well, it would be useful to me; on Mac OS X we call the binary /usr/sbin/apache.
The reason is that we might want to provide users with other web server options
as well, and calling them all httpd is at best vague.  Additionally we expect that
our users will know why there are a few 'apache' processes running on the
system, but they might not know what the hell all these httpd things are.  It's a
user-visible string, and clarity is a good thing.

That said, the diffs that remain in my version of apache from the standard 1.3.3
are all at this point with:

	1) build outside the source tree
	2) make the installed files fit into our filesystem layout.

#1 is in the queue to go in, and #2 has been waiting on #1 to happen, but it looks
like Ralfs patches here will go at least part of the way. They --with-layout=foo
idea is a good one for me, since presumably, I can extend it to meet our needs.
Presently I've added a bunch of options like --documentroot=foo and --cgibin=foo.

So all this stuff is looking pretty good for me.

	-Fred

---
	      Wilfredo Sanchez | wsanchez@apple.com | 408.974-5174
	Apple Computer, Inc., 1 Infinite Loop 302.4K, Cupertino, CA 95014
	          (Mac OS X) Core Operating Systems Group | BSD