httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Reid" <ab...@dial.pipex.com>
Subject Re: Working on autoconfing Apache 2.0
Date Tue, 23 Nov 1999 22:40:28 GMT
When it was said that autoconf would reduce portability was that just for
DSO's or for all the code?  If it's just DSO's then it isn't anywhere near a
big enough problem to stop autoconf is it???

d.
----- Original Message -----
From: Manoj Kasichainula <manojk@io.com>
To: <new-httpd@apache.org>
Sent: 23 November 1999 21:52
Subject: Re: Working on autoconfing Apache 2.0


> On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 10:30:54AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > Personally, I think it's best if the group decides whether or not we
> > reduce portability as a major goal in 2.0.
>
> I think that this is already determined for us. Whatever configuration
> system we use, whether it's src/Configuration, APACI,
> autoconf/automake, or MagicSuperSpoon, won't help us if we don't have
> access to a particular platform to test on. I can almost guarantee
> that 2.0 won't work on Nextstep until somebody out there using that
> system sends us a patch, for the simple reason that we've rewritten
> major chunks of the server.
>
> Once we switch to autoconf/automake, Nextstep could work out of the
> box. And if it doesn't, the changes required will likely be much
> smaller.
>
> And if libtool doesn't know about a particular platform, it's just as
> easy to tell the libtool maintainers about the flags as it is to tell
> us. We can notify the libtool guys about how to deal with the esoteric
> platforms that we know about, and as an extra bonus, other software
> packages get better support on those platforms too.
>
> --
> Manoj Kasichainula - manojk at io dot com - http://www.io.com/~manojk/


Mime
View raw message