tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jean-frederic clere <jfrederic.cl...@fujitsu-siemens.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1
Date Thu, 03 Oct 2002 09:32:33 GMT
Henri Gomez wrote:
> Costin Manolache wrote:
> 
>> Henri Gomez wrote:
>>
>>
>>> More comments on APR and JK2.
>>>
>>> While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also
>>> jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2
>>> built with JNI support.
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you have a multithreaded apache1.3 ? It's very important
>> to compile it as multithreaded and link pthread !
> 
> 
> No but added the LoadModule pthread directive.
> 
>> For the apr issues - I still think that apr should be treated as a 
>> general-purpose library, and we shouldn't have more than one varaiant 
>> in the system. 
> 
> 
> Yes

For the moment that is not the case.
For example you may need an APR with threads and another without.

> 
>> Probably some APR expert could clarify this - but my opinion is that 
>> on linux the right place for apr is /usr/lib/libapr.so.0.9.2
>> and /usr/include/apr.
> 
> 
> When you create an Apache 2.0.42, apr shared lib goes in /usr/lib, with
> /usr/lib/libapr.so.0.9.2. The includes goes in /usr/include/apache2.
> 
> When you're just build apr/apr-util, you should put them elsewhere to
> avoid collision with the one which are provided by apache2.
> 
> If you don't do this, you'll have a strange situation where you have
> to specify that you need apache2 to build apache 1.3 jk2 !
> 
> Also as I said the shared/static libs which came from apr 0.9.1 have
> major version in name, libapr-0.so, libaprutil-0.so...
> 
>> And I think Apache2.0 RPM should just depend on libapr.rpm, and same 
>> for mod_jk2.rpm
> 
> 
> I seems you could build Apache 2.0.42 against an allready
> present APR shared lib, and trying it right now but I still wonder
> why Apache 2.0.42 bundle an APR 0.9.2 where only APR 0.9.1 is available 
> as release.

We should ask httpd dev list.

> 
>> It's just too confusing to have 2 variants of the same library,
>> and it should be a portability library that can be used outside
>> apache - without apache having a special copy.
> 
> 
> I agree, but it's something which should be fixed by Apache 2.0 and
> APR teams, ie make Apache 2.0 use the latest APR release (0.9.1 or 0.9.2 
> ?).
> 
> May be JF could do something for us and also ask why the apr goes with
> the -0 in names....

To allow different versions of apr.
For example if you could have Apache 2.0 using APR 0.9.2 and subversion using 
APR 1.0.0.

> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message