From: Jim Jagielski <jim@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Message-Id: <199911171208.HAA09502@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: apache-1.3/src CHANGES
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 07:08:46 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <19991117101925.A18138@engelschall.com> from "Ralf S.
 Engelschall" at Nov 17, 1999 10:19:25 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> 
> 
> In article <19991117022511.14092.qmail@hyperreal.org> you wrote:
> > wsanchez    99/11/16 18:25:08
> > 
> >   Modified:    .        configure
> >                src      CHANGES
> >   Log:
> >   Add --with-port option.
> >   Submitted by:	Ian Kallen <spidaman@salon.com>
> 
> >   +        --with-port=*)
> >   +            echo "Using port $apc_optarg"
> >   +            port="$apc_optarg"
> >   +            ;;
> 
> Do you really think it's important to print this?  I personally would
> appreciate that we don't do this, because this info is not such important.  Or
> in other words: For consistency, either print also similar things or print
> none of them. But just to print the port is confusing IMHO.
> 

I thought it was so if someone tees off the output (to save or maybe
send someone), the port value is noted in the build process.

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
                "Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"