Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 72231 invoked by uid 500); 24 Nov 2001 09:00:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 72220 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 09:00:20 -0000 Message-ID: From: GOMEZ Henri To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: RE: Apache 2.0.27 and 2.0.28 RPM available Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:00:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Thank, I just sent logs to you, JF and Pier :) Feel free to forward to the list. Nota that I'm running Redhat 7.2 where a libtool > 1.4 is installed - Henri Gomez ___[_]____ EMAIL : hgomez@slib.fr (. .) PGP KEY : 697ECEDD ...oOOo..(_)..oOOo... PGP Fingerprint : 9DF8 1EA8 ED53 2F39 DC9B 904A 364F 80E6 >-----Original Message----- >From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:jerenkrantz@ebuilt.com] >Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 9:58 AM >To: dev@httpd.apache.org >Subject: Re: Apache 2.0.27 and 2.0.28 RPM available > > >On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 09:44:56AM +0100, GOMEZ Henri wrote: >> Yes, if you take a look a tomcat-dev for JTC, you'll see >that I couldn't >> build mod_webapp for Apache 2.0 with Apache 2.0 libtool, but I could >> with GNU libtool. I could send you many logs of >mod_jk/mod_webapp built >> with system libtool and apache 2.0 generated libtool. Also I >could attach >> the generated libtool. > >Eh? Sure. Just send the logs. Out of curiousity, try downloading >the OS/X-specific distribution of httpd-2.0.28 as we built that one >with libtool-1.4.2 (there is no other difference). Madhu reported >that newer versions of libtool don't work on HP-UX. If the version >that we are including (1.3.4-freebsd-ports) is more trouble than it >is worth, we can reverse it by building HP-UX-specific tarballs >instead (with 1.3.4-freebsd-ports) and use 1.4.2+ for everyone else. >That'd be my preference if I were RM anyway. > >> With that patch, I could make web_app start compiling on a system >> where apr is not installed under $prefix. I strongly believe in APR >> and I saw not reason why we should have APR installed alone on >> system, and to follow FHS it should live under /usr/lib/libapr* and >> /usr/include/apr/apr_*.h. Dito for Expat... > >What you want here is not apr-include or apr-lib, I think what you >really want is the option to point httpd-2.0 at precompiled APR >and Expat. For Expat, that option is already there (but may not >be the default - check in apr-util for the exact option). For APR, >we probably don't want to do this until we have release APR on its >own. But, I guess we could throw it in there as an option. >Thoughts? > >> Nice, does it means that I won't have to also add my defines in >> ap_config.h ? > >Should be. -- justin >