httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Randy Terbush" <ra...@covalent.net>
Subject RE: Apache NT release
Date Thu, 29 Jul 1999 19:29:27 GMT
I'm currently building with VS 6.0 and aside from some changes to the
clean targets to wildcard certain file names, I've not noticed any
major work needed here. I'm not using the .dsp files.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
> [mailto:new-httpd-owner@apache.org]On
> Behalf Of Greg Marr
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 2:00 PM
> To: new-httpd@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Apache NT release
>
>
> Since I haven't introduced myself yet, here's a very brief intro:
> I'm a software developer from central Mass.  I've been
> programming as
> a hobby in various "languages" including BASIC,
> sh/csh/tcsh, C, Perl,
> and C++ for about 15 years now.  During my years at WPI, I spent a
> lot of time exploring the UNIX systems, including a year or so
> running my own DECStation.  Since then, I've been writing software
> under Windows (NT preferred) for almost three years now, 2 1/2
> professionally.  I do still have access to development tools on the
> UNIX machines at WPI, but use them much less frequently now, doing
> the majority of my work on WinNT, both at work and at home.
>
> At 02:25 PM 7/29/99 , Randy Terbush wrote:
> >While in Seattle recently having dinner with Paul Sutton,
> Roy and Ken,
> >I indicated that I would be willing to start doing the Apache NT
> >release package. I only have InstallShield 5.5 and would
> want to make
> >the changes to allow for that. Bear in mind that I won't be able to
> >have that completed for another week. If anyone wants to beat me to
> >that, be my guest.
>
> While reading the archives, I noticed some discussion a few months
> back about converting the .DSP files for compiling under NT/95 to
> Visual C++ 6.0, and for building the release using 6.0.  I noticed
> that the projects are still version 5.  Are there any plans to
> convert them to 6.0, or to use 6.0 to produce the binaries?
>  I posted
> some changes recently that could be made to the DSP files to make
> things easier for debugging, but since I only have 6.0 installed, I
> could only post a textual description of the changes rather than a
> patch to the DSPs, since the patch would convert them to 6.0.
>
> Some of the changes to the projects would produce .pdb
> files for all
> DLLs in the distribution, even in release mode.  If these were
> produced, it might be worthwhile to include them as a separate
> optional component of the custom install.
>
> --
> Greg Marr
> gregm@alum.wpi.edu
> "We thought you were dead."
> "I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
>


Mime
View raw message