httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sander Temme <>
Subject Re: [vote] 2.2.0 tarballs
Date Thu, 01 Dec 2005 07:15:55 GMT

On Nov 30, 2005, at 10:53 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 10:35:07PM -0800, Sander Temme wrote:
>>> I'm looking at this. If you give that apu buildconf the right -- 
>>> with- apr parameter, buildconf completes. The problem is, if the
>> Just to reiterate - buildconf is not necessary for users to run.
>> Therefore, if it's broken for 2.2.0, it's not a showstopper.  --  
>> justin
> Is buildconf present?  If the user runs it, does it corrupt the  
> unpacked tree?
> If this is so, and it's broken, then perhaps remove buildconf  
> throughout the
> tree, and the autoconf source files, resulting in a vanilla ./ 
> configure for
> the resulting distribution package?

Hm... you kinda need it if you drop in a custom module with its  
config5.m4 foo. Or if you want to build with a different libtool than  
httpd came with. I agree that's kinda deep though.

I wouldn't hold up the release for it.


PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4  B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF

View raw message