Re: [wrowe@rowe-clan.net: RE: *.exports in distro bundle, use of , Perl on Windows (was: Re: make_export.awk)]

[Mo DeJong <md...@cygnus.com>]

On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Greg Stein wrote:

> ----- Forwarded message from "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> -----
> 
> From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
> Subject: RE: *.exports in distro bundle, use of Perl on Windows (was: Re: make_export.awk)
> To: "'Greg Stein'" <gs...@lyra.org>
> Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 15:20:28 -0600
> 
> > From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@lyra.org]
> > Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2000 2:37 PM
> > 
> > On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 10:28:07AM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> > > 
> > > It turns out there are no other Perl scripts, except for on
> > > Windows.  Regardless, OtherBill made a decision to not use awk or sed in
> > > the step that modifies the default config file.  I really think we need to
> > > find out why he made that decision.  If he chose not to use awk for a
> > > reason, then we can not force him to use awk on Windows now.
> > 
> > It was for simple expediency. All that the code does is a 
> > search/replace.
> > 
> > We could use sed or awk or a teeny C program to do that. No 
> > need for Perl.
> 
> Ack... there was -no- particular reason I used Perl, other than it was
> most handy, and is already used for all .dsp (and my early attempts at bcc)
> munging already.  
> 
> I'll change, no problem.  The only advantage to Perl is that it is the one
> free interpreted language many Windows web authors may have already installed.
> Awk is definately a stretch - only diehards already have it installed.
> 
> Bill

I guess I don't follow the logic there. How exactly would Windows
developers run the configure script if they did not have Cygwin
installed? Last I checked, perl did not read sh files, so you
would need to have a version of /bin/sh on the Windows box
to be able to run configure. I was not aware that there was
a pure Win32 version of /bin/sh, I had always assumed people
would be using Cygwin to run the ./configure script. Since
Cygwin does not come with perl and it does come with gnu
utils like sed and awk, we should use the utils and not
perl. Does that sound reasonable to everyone?

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc

RE: [wrowe@rowe-clan.net: RE: *.exports in distro bundle, use of , Perl on Windows (was: Re: make_export.awk)]

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mo DeJong [mailto:mdejong@cygnus.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2000 3:56 PM
> To: dev@apr.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [wrowe@rowe-clan.net: RE: *.exports in distro bundle, use
> of , Perl on Windows (was: Re: make_export.awk)]
> 
> 
> > 
> > I'll change, no problem.  The only advantage to Perl is that it is the one
> > free interpreted language many Windows web authors may have already installed.
> > Awk is definately a stretch - only diehards already have it installed.
> > 
> > Bill
> 
> I guess I don't follow the logic there. How exactly would Windows
> developers run the configure script if they did not have Cygwin
> installed? Last I checked, perl did not read sh files, so you
> would need to have a version of /bin/sh on the Windows box
> to be able to run configure. I was not aware that there was
> a pure Win32 version of /bin/sh, I had always assumed people
> would be using Cygwin to run the ./configure script. Since
> Cygwin does not come with perl and it does come with gnu
> utils like sed and awk, we should use the utils and not
> perl. Does that sound reasonable to everyone?

Nak, no, you cannot incorporate cygwin on win32 for apr/apache, 
and, no, Win32 doesn't run ./configure, and no, we don't expect 
anyone on win32 to handle installation of anything beyond the 
easy-to-install activestate perl, or we incoroporate the Lucient 
licensed awk.  Apr itself is not built on cygwin porting.

This is a copy of CYGWIN_LICENSE from the cygwin sources...
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify 
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL) as 
published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the 
License, or (at your option) any later version. 

and that, for an Apache project, is the kiss of death.