httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brian Havard" <>
Subject Re: How to build 2.0 with autoconf
Date Fri, 21 Jan 2000 13:16:05 GMT
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:12:22 -0500 (EST), wrote:

>I am responding to all three recent messages in this thread here.  All
>three are about porting the autoconf build process to non-unix platforms.
>1)  This is convincing me even more that autoconf is a bad thing.  :-)
>2)  The way to solve all of these problems is to do what was done for
>windows.  Create the header file that autoconf would have generated for
>you.  This shouldn't be too hard to do.
>3)  Why are we having this problem now?  My understanding was that Apache
>2.0 has been building on BeOS, Mac OS X, and OS/390 for a while.  I know
>we just changed the build process to require autoconf for Apache, but
>autoconf has _always_ been required for APR.  I am trying to figure things
>out here, not cause problems.  Is the reason we are having problems
>because we are requiring version 2.13?  Do we really need to require that
>version of autoconf, or can we make due with earlier versions?

APR is ok because it only uses autoconf. The main apache config uses
autoconf/automake/libtool so supporting a platform requires all 3 to be
ported. There is a good port of autoconf 2.13 for OS/2, automake has been
replaced(?) but the only port of libtool is "alpha" and too old (v1.2d but
1.3.3 is required). So the only options I have right now are to port a
current libtool myself (yuck!) or abandon the standard configure mechanism
and do my own as has been done for Win32 (also yuck!). Arrg!

 |  Brian Havard                 |  "He is not the messiah!                   |
 |  |  He's a very naughty boy!" - Life of Brian |

View raw message