httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ralf S. Engelschall" <...@engelschall.com>
Subject Re: Shared memory in APR. (fwd)
Date Thu, 15 Jul 1999 17:38:54 GMT

In article <199907151248.IAA19176@devsys.jaguNET.com> you wrote:
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, Michael H. Voase wrote:
>> 
>> >    Alright, I see what I missed. Ill get out the
>> > paper bag and sit in the corner for a while to cool off ;).
>> > 
>> >    So in that case I can peel of a fork of
>> > apr and convert it into a portability lib?
>> 
>> Why bother forking it.  As soon as I figure out autoconf completely,
>> you'll be able to do things like:
> 
> Well, figuring out autoconf isn't that hard. IMO the difficult part
> is the best way to implement it. Sometimes you can get by with
> just autoconf, other times you need automake as well. Whether you
> want or need libtool is another factor. By having the framework of
> the code set, you can better figure it out.

My opinion is this: Automake is usually nice for large source trees and
overkill for small ones.  Actually I personally also dislike its output (it's
too much garbage).  Libtool OTOH is only important when you want to provide
the building of shared libraries. If not, you don't need libtool. Shtool is
mainly important when you want a "make install" target or some other special
things. If you don't need this for APR, you also don't need shtool, of course.
I personally would use Autoconf+Libtool+Shtool for APR and don't use Automake.
But feel free to decide on your own, Ryan ;)

                                       Ralf S. Engelschall
                                       rse@engelschall.com
                                       www.engelschall.com

Mime
View raw message