Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 24595 invoked by uid 500); 14 Nov 2000 04:41:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 24576 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2000 04:41:42 -0000 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:43:09 -0800 (PST) From: rbb@covalent.net X-Sender: rbb@koj.rkbloom.net To: "new-httpd@apache.org" , Brian Havard Subject: Re: architecture-specific directories In-Reply-To: <200011140429.PAA04987@silk.apana.org.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > >This is what Will Rowe suggested. I have no great opinion either way, but > >I would point out one deficiency with this method (not that the current > >method doesn't have it's drawbacks. :-) The only drawback I see, is that > >this ties each platform to a single default OS. > > For the example you came up with (OS/2 wanting to use some Win32 code) the > INCLUDES line can be suitably modified in that particular module, but for > now it's not needed and I seriously doubt it will ever be. All the win32 > modules use Win32 API calls which OS/2 isn't going to accept. All the other > non-unix code is tightly tied to that specific platform too. That makes perfect sense. This swayed me. :-) Brian, Thanks for explaining. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------