Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 08:57:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ryan Bloom <rbb@raleigh.ibm.com>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: Building APR.
In-Reply-To: <19990914133940.A85550@engelschall.com>
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.LNX.4.04.9909140851290.26333-100000@chosondo.raleigh.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org


> Err... sure, after a "cvs co" you've to manually bootstrap once because you've
> removed "configure" recently. But that's just a CVS issue, not a configuration
> issue. BTW, that's why I always keep "configure" script in CVS, even if it's
> redundant. But this way it's easier for working with the stuff in multiple
> checked out trees.

Okay, but that's what I'm saying.  We need to add the output from
autoheader and autoconf.  They have been removed recently.  Not having
them in means that we are relying that the person wanting to compile
Apache has autoheader and autoconf.  If we are willing to say that, then
we might as well execute them from Apache's Configure command.  It just
doesn't hold water for me to say that we can't run autoheader/autoconf
because not everybody has them installed, but then not have their output
in CVS.  I would like to know why they were removed, and I would like to
re-examine the decision to remove them.

If we are going to say that APR can be built by building Apache, then I
think it needs to be true, and it should be poissible to run either:

APACI:

    ./configure  (with opts)
    make

or
    cd src
    ./Configure (after creating Configuration)
    make

If this is not possible after a fresh extract, then it is not possible to
build APR by building Apache.

Ryan 


_______________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom		rbb@raleigh.ibm.com
4205 S Miami Blvd	
RTP, NC 27709		It's a beautiful sight to see good dancers 
			doing simple steps.  It's a painful sight to
			see beginners doing complicated patterns.