httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthieu Estrade <mestr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] 2.1.3 as beta
Date Wed, 23 Feb 2005 15:57:20 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> --On Wednesday, February 23, 2005 5:55 PM +0200 Graham Leggett 
> <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:
>
>> As soon as you install httpd + APR in a system location, you no 
>> longer can
>> install subversion + APR in a system location. This was the basis of
>> getting vendor packaging files (like RPM and PKG) into APR and httpd, so
>> that there was a system APR and packages that depended on it correctly.
>>
>> If the user installs httpd in a custom directory, then bundling makes
>> sense, but if httpd is supposed to go into /usr or /usr/local then
>> bundling becomes a big problem.
>>
>> APR has grown up. At some point, APR must graduate to be a "system"
>> library, and I think that time is httpd v2.2.x.
>
>
> I'm just not convinced that folks will have APR 1.x as a system 
> library at this point.  If APR were optional, I might tend to agree.  
> However, it's a mandatory dependence.  I really dislike all those 
> GNOME packages that require a whole bunch of implicit dependencies 
> that they never tell you about. Bundling the mandatory dependencies as 
> a fallback is goodness.
>
> I would be happy to switch the find_ap{ru}.m4 to try to look for an 
> installed APR/APR-util first if --with-apr{-util} is not specified.  
> I'm shocked it doesn't do that already.  Would that alleviate your 
> concerns?  -- justin
>
I think it's the best way.
Maybe we could also provide two packages, httpd-with-apr and another one 
without apr



Mime
View raw message