httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dwayne Miller <>
Subject Re: Volunteers to drive an MSI build
Date Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:10:29 GMT
My apologies for the Disclaimer at the bottom.  I had forgotten that it
was appended to all outgoing email.  I've asked that it be not appended to
dev-http email address, so this is basically my test to see if that work
was done correctly.

2 questions to start:
 - where does one find the approved source for a specific release (I.e.
2.2.24)?  I found the 2.2.x branch, but not sure if that is the correct
location of the latest approved release, release candidate; do I need to
specify tags, etc.
 - Any trick to getting Win32 files (CRLF instead of LF only)?

On 3/11/13 3:11 PM, "William A. Rowe Jr." <> wrote:

>On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:41:48 +0000
>Dwayne Miller <> wrote:
>> I'm rejoining this list after several years of inactivity.  I'm
>> joining primarily in regards to this thread.
>> I would like to help if possible.
>We are starting from scratch with 2.4.x.  Several key reasons;
> - Long past time to shift to an OSS msi packaging solution.
> - ... with a package schema which supports 'upgrade'
> - ... and rewrites utf-8 paths within the stock .conf files
> - Deploys cgi-bin/conf/logs/htdocs/proxy/cache to a non-static,
>   path outside of program files (perhaps a tree beneath
>   c:\Program Data\Apache Software Foundatation\,
>   but why
>   is that hidden?)
>> I'm also curious as to the reason for the absence of the MSI build
>> for the two most recent releases?  Is this a volunteer issue?  Is it
>> a technology issue?  A license issue?
>Well first off, they are always a convenience.  ASF projects release
>source code.  Some ship binaries or jars for user convenience, but
>those aren't releases.  Binaries are largely left to platform packagers
>as you'll see looking for a long list of platforms underneath
> .  Netware and Win32 had
>traditionally had these since there weren't 'packagers' in the unix
>sense of the term.
>A system crash on this volunteer's box led to the gap for Windows.
>Which has led me to creating VM's for antique VC6 (httpd 2.2) and
>modern Visual studio so I never have this ordeal again.  Almost had
>this resolved at ApacheCon until I realized I had six database devel
>packages to install for all supported apr-util dbd/dbm backends.
>Should be wrapped up in the next couple of days now that I'm back
>at my own office after an extended stay in Portland.
>But that catches us up with 2.2.23 and 2.2.24 builds, see above why
>I had held off of 2.4.x releases.  Once we ship one 2.4.x MSI there
>will be no incentive to get this right until 3.x.
>> I have read the list, and just not sure what triggered the topic
>> after years of MSI builds being available on the site.
>See bullet list above.
>> I have started looking at the MSI project code, the instructions for
>> building in a windows environment (I normally build for Mac OSX, but
>> have access to Windows/MS tools too).  Hopefully I'll be caught up
>> soon.
>Sounds great.
>> Disclaimer: This message is intended only for the use of the
>> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
>> information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or exempt
>> from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
>> recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the
>> intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing,
>> distributing, copying, or in any way using this message. If you have
>> received this communication in error, please notify the sender and
>> destroy and delete any copies you may have received.
>Really?  You violated that disclaimer under your own volition
>publishing your note to  public forum. But we would really rather
>not read that sort of claptrap on the public dev lists, thanks.

View raw message