httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: How to build 2.0 with autoconf
Date Fri, 21 Jan 2000 12:48:51 GMT
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000, Brian Havard wrote:
> 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!

Why can't you just use something other than libtool? I don't see that you
need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Keep autoconf. Use the Apache 1.3 mechanism for building your library,
rather than libtool.

We already have the technology for building libraries on all platforms. We
just wanted to stop maintaining it, in favor or leveraging libtool. If
libtool does not work, then just use the old mechanism. At least we gain
some leverage for platforms X and Y, despite not supporting Z.

Apache 1.3 for Win32 never used APACI, so why is it a bad thing to not use
autoconf today? That is faulty logic. Heck... did Win32 even use
Configuration. Hrm... looking at the repository, it doesn't seem so.
Makefile_win32.txt specifically builds a number of modules using makefiles
down in src/os/win32/.

In other words: Apache 1.3 for Win32 had *NO* automated configuration
tool. It was all done manually.

These complaints about how we should toss autoconf simply because it
doesn't work on My Pet Platform are a bit faulty. Just use the old, manual
mechanism, or integrate the old mechanism into the current autoconf
process. All that technology is still in the CVS repository... nobody has
deleted it yet.


Greg Stein,

View raw message