httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pier Fumagalli <p...@betaversion.org>
Subject Re: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical OS-specific requirements
Date Tue, 09 Apr 2002 13:47:49 GMT
"rbb@apache.org" <rbb@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:50:34PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>>> Guys, this is a SOURCE tarball.  We don't need to provide every possible
>>> software combination for source tarballs.  If one of our users requires
>>> a specific version of libtool, then they can install that version.  If
>>> it is a binary install, then we have to use a specific version.
>>> 
>>> If you try to do this for every version, we'll have hundreds of tarballs
>>> for every release.
>> 
>> The problem is that there is *no* version of libtool available
>> that works out-of-the-box.  If we could tell people to just
>> download libtool-1.4.2 and use that, that'd be fine.  But, we can't
>> do that since no version of libtool released by GNU works on OS X.
>> So, I think we can be nice and provide a tarball that has a
>> working libtool.
> 
> That makes me like the idea of a special package even less.  If I can't
> get a working copy from libtool, then I can't package it cleanly.  When we
> first went to libtool, we called out this problem and said that we would
> be reliant on the libtool team to make things work.  Now we have to deal
> with that.  The solution isn't to create a hacked version of libtool,
> IMNSHO, it is to work with that team to make sure that they have stuff
> that works.

Ryan, if you look into the archives, you'll see that I tried (several times)
to submit patches to the LibTool team... And version is still 1.4.2...

    Pier


Mime
View raw message