httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gregg L. Smith" <li...@glewis.com>
Subject makefile.win DBM fix Was Re: [VOTE] httpd 2.2.13 candidate
Date Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:41:06 GMT
It works, finds just x and goes happily on its way past it as it should.


  cd ..\dbm
  for %d in ( x) do if not %d == x  NMAKE  -f apr_dbm_%d.mak
CFG="apr_dbm_%d - Win32 Release" RECURSE=0
C:\build\httpd-2.2.x-dev\srclib\apr-util\dbm>if not x == x NMAKE -f
apr_dbm_x.mak CFG="apr_dbm_x - Win32 Release" RECURSE=0
  cd ..\..\..
  cd modules\ssl


I am a bit less concerned why it worked fine before for you and not for 
me since when DBD was added to the build, there was a check for an 
undefined list before it would let it into the loop that was taken out 
when Tom added the odbc to the build. So this obviously tripped others 
before, and it has now reared it's head again but now in the DBM 
section. As I look at R664253 it was you that did that ;-) most likely 
just to skip going into the loop unnecessarily I guess but also it kept 
this problem from showing cause I know it is not just me this is 
happening to this time.

It is strange tho because at the command line it does not do this.
C:\build\httpd-2.2.x-dev> for %d in () do echo "hello world"

C:\build\httpd-2.2.x-dev>

I thought I had tried a command line build as well as IDE, I'm sure of 
it. Newbies (those 'spoiled folks' who eventually do get guts and decide 
to try compiling) always use the IDE so this keeps this from happening 
to them if it is just an IDE problem. Oh course, on VC9 w/ just the 
included Express SDK only, it'll go down before that at odbc, but so 
will mod_deflate, mod_ssl and abs and I see no way around that. I'm not 
a fan of downloading and installing a pretty much unneeded 1.2G of stuff 
just for devenv, I just add them to the buildbin project skipping the 
check cause I know support is there and it saves time. On that note, in 
Windows, couldn't the odbc project be added to buildbin (or the normal 
make run) instead of going out to the makefile now? not that it matters 
much.

Gregg


William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Gregg L. Smith wrote:
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>>>   +/-1
>>>>   [+1]  Release httpd-2.2.13 as GA
>>> This is looking fine on windows, is up at /dev/dist as -src-win32,
>>> and binaries will follow in the morning.
>> non-binding +9/10 on Windows. Please see PR 47659 for the last 1/10.
>> This is only a build process failure due to a small oversight in the
>> makefile.
> 
> I offered an alternative solution (one based on too many /bin/sh for
> loops :-) Could you test 2.2 branch or even just apr-util/1.3.x branch
> so we have this right in the next release?
> 
> I'm still puzzled, since my modern cmd.exe shells never complain about
> empty for %x in () do loops.



Mime
View raw message