httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rasmus Lerdorf <>
Subject Re: Working on autoconfing Apache 2.0
Date Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:28:40 GMT
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> > 
> > One drawback is
> > that we loose support for some more or less esoteric platforms where
> > libtool still has no knowledge or still is broken (we could fix this
> > ourself, even libtool is a little bit unfriendly to enhance and fix).
> > But the advantage is that as the same time we get an easy solution for
> > DSOs under mostly all other platforms, including mostly all major Unix
> > flavors. IMHO this is worth the decision to use libtool. Why? Because I
> > think for other reasons (related to Autoconf, etc.) we already have to
> > accept to loose some too problematic platforms we supported in the past.
> > So effectively it wouldn't really harm if we choose libtool.
> > 
> Personally, I think it's best if the group decides whether or not we
> reduce portability as a major goal in 2.0. That is basically what this
> boils down to: do we drop portability as a major consideration (which
> many people say is one main reason for Apache's success) or do we
> simply say "we're designing for the main OSs (whatever they are) and
> that's that." 
> Whichever way it is, I think it's something that the group needs to
> determine. 

Right, but keep in mind that it took us *9* revision levels of Apache
1.3.x to just get it working on Linux.  And that is one of the major
platforms in terms of numbers out there.  As far as I am concerned our
portability when it comes to DSOs has never been very good and I really
don't think we are looking at losing portability in that respect.


View raw message