httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Marr <gr...@alum.wpi.edu>
Subject RE: Draft proposal: Win32 Compilation Environment Step 1
Date Mon, 17 Apr 2000 20:48:08 GMT
At 04:31 PM 04/17/2000, Greg Stein wrote:
>Forget delay loading and all that stuff. Statically link APR into 
>apache.exe and be done with it.
>
>APR will still build outside of Apache, but when we redistribute APR 
>as part of Apache, then we should do a static link. That solves the 
>path problem, the relocation problem, etc.

It also increases the code size of any server that uses any DLL 
modules that use APR, since they'll have to statically link against 
APR as well.  This can also cause no end of problems with static 
variables, if APR has any, since Apache itself, and every module that 
it loads, will have its own copy of the statics.  Leaving APR as a 
DLL means that everything can use the same copy of the code, and 
there's only one of every static.  This is the same reason that 
Apache and all the modules link against the DLL version of the C 
Runtime library.

>I see no purpose served by having the Apache distribution be able to 
>build an APR DLL. When APR starts shipping standalone, then we can 
>possible update Apache to dynlink against it.

I see no purpose served by having Apache link statically against APR.

If the problem is with the programs in the support directory being 
able to find the APR dll, then put a copy of the APR dll in the 
support directory, put the support programs in the main directory, or 
have the support programs link to APR statically.

--
Greg Marr
gregm@alum.wpi.edu
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"


Mime
View raw message