httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dietz, Phil E." <>
Subject RE: am I dreaming?
Date Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:40:18 GMT
It seems to me that the only requirement to accomplish binary module
compatibility, is to add a separate define MAGIC_DSO_VERSION.

That define would be set by Configure and would be independent for each OS
-- as some So will require DSO recompiles while other's wont.

Before a new apache release, a core member must validate the So
MAGIC_DSO_VERSION it can successfully run.

If a core member doesn't certify a DSO level before release, then the
MAGIC_DSO_VERSION will be incremented automatically.  Binary mods will be
forced to recompile.

As with any open-source, the people that hate recompiling binary mods will
join the Apache group to make sure the DSO testing for their OS is done to
their satisfaction next time.

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Dean Gaudet []
	Sent:	Thursday, March 25, 1999 4:16 PM
	Subject:	RE: am I dreaming? 

	On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Alexei Kosut wrote:

	> Yep... but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. So long as it's
done right,

	Dude, we're talking about code here.  The "dreaming" word in the
	applies pretty heavily whenever you talk about "doing something
right" :) 

	> I certainly think binary modules are a good thing. Not so much so
	> can ship proprietary modules but so people can ship
	> modules. Especially on systems like NT where installing a
	> module requires the purchase (and installation) of a compiler.

	Then they can wait the extra day after release for folks to build
the new
	modules.  That's what we're talking about here, a day or two -- the
	changes we make are generally easy to recover at the source level
(in fact
	no changes except a recompile are typically required).

	> This is one of the reasons I like Java. Source and binary
	> are one and the same. A native Java interface to the Apache API
might not
	> be a bad idea, even if just for this reason. Of course, it might
be a bad
	> idea for other reasons :)

	Stop dreaming :) 

	Even if we were using java and we changed the equivalent of
	wouldn't have changed one damn thing.  It's not a language problem
at all! 


View raw message