You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to current-testers@httpd.apache.org by Greg Ames <gr...@remulak.net> on 2001/11/06 00:24:45 UTC
httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
vote for beta.
Thanks,
Greg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:15:12AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 05 November 2001 05:56 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause
> > > problems however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
> >
> > Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> > on to 2.0.28?
> >
> > Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
>
> Just edit the script and re-roll the tarballs. No need to re-tag, none of the
> files have changed.
>
> Ryan
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
You make want to fix the 2.0.X so that it can compile in BSD.
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:15:12AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 05 November 2001 05:56 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause
> > > problems however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
> >
> > Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> > on to 2.0.28?
> >
> > Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
>
> Just edit the script and re-roll the tarballs. No need to re-tag, none of the
> files have changed.
>
> Ryan
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
You make want to fix the 2.0.X so that it can compile in BSD.
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Monday 05 November 2001 05:56 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause
> > problems however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
>
> Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> on to 2.0.28?
>
> Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
Just edit the script and re-roll the tarballs. No need to re-tag, none of the
files have changed.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Monday 05 November 2001 05:56 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause
> > problems however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
>
> Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> on to 2.0.28?
>
> Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
Just edit the script and re-roll the tarballs. No need to re-tag, none of the
files have changed.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:22:17AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 November 2001 03:27 am, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> > > Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
> > >
> > >
> > > Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> > > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> > > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> > > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> > > Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> > > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> > > Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> > > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> > > exit
> >
> > Use gmake.
>
> No offense, but that is a bogus answer. We specifically do not require gmake.
> If we do, then it is a bug.
>
> Ryan
Ryan, one can guess the Daniel may not be familiar with BSD make procedures.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:22:17AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 November 2001 03:27 am, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> > > Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
> > >
> > >
> > > Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> > > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> > > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> > > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> > > Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> > > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> > > Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> > > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> > > exit
> >
> > Use gmake.
>
> No offense, but that is a bogus answer. We specifically do not require gmake.
> If we do, then it is a bug.
>
> Ryan
Ryan, one can guess the Daniel may not be familiar with BSD make procedures.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Tuesday 06 November 2001 03:27 am, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> > Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
> >
> >
> > Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> > Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> > Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> > exit
>
> Use gmake.
No offense, but that is a bogus answer. We specifically do not require gmake.
If we do, then it is a bug.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Tuesday 06 November 2001 03:27 am, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> > Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
> >
> >
> > Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> > Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> > Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> > exit
>
> Use gmake.
No offense, but that is a bogus answer. We specifically do not require gmake.
If we do, then it is a bug.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
We appreciate the help from the early testers like yourself, so please
feel free to post any problems you encounter in our builds.
> Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> exit
Both of those lines are include statements in my rules.mk file, what
are they in your's? How about Makefile:32? What were the steps that
your performed that lead up to this?
-aaron
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 05:18:56PM +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
>
> The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> that platform.
>
> - Sascha Experience IRCG
> http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
>
Again.
Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
exit
Script done on Mon Nov 5 19:18:45 2001
The first make is the bsd make. Note the need and operator warning.
The 2nd is GNU Make and it claims separator missing.
Enough said.
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 05:18:56PM +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
>
> The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> that platform.
>
> - Sascha Experience IRCG
> http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
>
Again.
Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
exit
Script done on Mon Nov 5 19:18:45 2001
The first make is the bsd make. Note the need and operator warning.
The 2nd is GNU Make and it claims separator missing.
Enough said.
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 12:33:24PM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, The Doctor wrote:
>
> > > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> > > force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be using
> > > portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only convert
> > > to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
> >
> > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
> > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
>
> Actually 1.x is not platform agnostic... it's just that a lot of effort
> went into making it look that way from the outside. 2.0 is far more
> platform agnostic than 1.x could ever be. We obviously have some issues
> with make on BSD/OS that we need to look into, but that's fixable.
>
Need a BSD/OS account to do work on?
> --Cliff
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Cliff Woolley
> cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
> Charlottesville, VA
>
>
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 09:56:07PM +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
>
> Not really, it just hardcodes values for various
> operating-systems and breaks hard, if it encounters an
> unknown OS. Apache 2.0 is much more flexible in supporting
> OSes it has not heard of, if they provide common APIs or if
> they are similar to another OS (e.g. FreeBSD-4 becoming
> FreeBSD-5).
>
> > > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
> >
> > It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
>
> Well, true. Considering all the Apache 2.x problems, I'd ask
> you not to blow this out of proportion though. :)
I have pointed this for 3 months. I finally get heard.
>
> - Sascha Experience IRCG
> http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
>
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 09:56:07PM +0100, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
>
> Not really, it just hardcodes values for various
> operating-systems and breaks hard, if it encounters an
> unknown OS. Apache 2.0 is much more flexible in supporting
> OSes it has not heard of, if they provide common APIs or if
> they are similar to another OS (e.g. FreeBSD-4 becoming
> FreeBSD-5).
>
> > > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
> >
> > It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
>
> Well, true. Considering all the Apache 2.x problems, I'd ask
> you not to blow this out of proportion though. :)
I have pointed this for 3 months. I finally get heard.
>
> - Sascha Experience IRCG
> http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
>
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 12:52:56AM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > Flatten them. APR deals with it by placing all of the rules in
> > one file and selectively activates the rules according to what variables
> > are set in the including file (e.g., SUBDIRS, TARGETS, etc.), which has
> > the effect of selecting a rule via its dependencies.
>
> Makes sense.
>
> [ Gotta love these "little" changes that snowball into an overhaul of the
> build system. :) No wonder these things got put on hold. ]
Bingo! I spent a truely hideous amount of time just getting to the point
where I understood what needed to be done. I tried to do exactly what
you are starting on twice, but both times I ran into some other aspect
of the build system that required a couple days of work to fix first.
Good luck. ;-)
....Roy
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Flatten them. APR deals with it by placing all of the rules in
> one file and selectively activates the rules according to what variables
> are set in the including file (e.g., SUBDIRS, TARGETS, etc.), which has
> the effect of selecting a rule via its dependencies.
Makes sense.
[ Gotta love these "little" changes that snowball into an overhaul of the
build system. :) No wonder these things got put on hold. ]
I'll look into this in the morning.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> That sounds like a fine idea to me... except how do you deal with the fact
> that any given Makefile in httpd might include two or three different
> files, whereas in APR all Makefiles only include rules.mk?
Flatten them. APR deals with it by placing all of the rules in
one file and selectively activates the rules according to what variables
are set in the including file (e.g., SUBDIRS, TARGETS, etc.), which has
the effect of selecting a rule via its dependencies.
httpd is including separate rules files based on what type of variables
would be set. In other words, it is a config-time conditional rather
than a make-time conditional. The problem is that it depends on include
being portable, which it isn't, which is why apr took a different path.
....Roy
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by David Reid <dr...@jetnet.co.uk>.
Seems doable...
I'm looking at it at the moment as BSDi's build seems broken right now.
Slightly different solution though.
david
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Woolley" <cl...@yahoo.com>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>
Cc: <de...@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 5:22 AM
Subject: Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > Yeah, ditch the bsd_makefile script and simply use configure to do
> > the symbol replacement of @INCLUDE_RULES@, like it is done in apr.
> > The httpd way of doing it is bogus. That was on the long list
> > of things to do for the single-build system.
>
> That sounds like a fine idea to me... except how do you deal with the fact
> that any given Makefile in httpd might include two or three different
> files, whereas in APR all Makefiles only include rules.mk?
>
> --Cliff
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Cliff Woolley
> cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
> Charlottesville, VA
>
>
>
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Yeah, ditch the bsd_makefile script and simply use configure to do
> the symbol replacement of @INCLUDE_RULES@, like it is done in apr.
> The httpd way of doing it is bogus. That was on the long list
> of things to do for the single-build system.
That sounds like a fine idea to me... except how do you deal with the fact
that any given Makefile in httpd might include two or three different
files, whereas in APR all Makefiles only include rules.mk?
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> > Looks like apr-util's configure.in is actually to blame... should have
> > this nailed down shortly.
>
> Okay, well that problem's taken care of. Next problem is that if you
> rerun configure without deleting the 0-byte bsd_makefile file in the
> top-level directory first, the build/bsd_makefile script thinks it's
> already been run, so it doesn't, and build/rules.mk gets written in sysv
> format by configure that second time around.
>
> Anybody have a good idea how to fix that problem?
Yeah, ditch the bsd_makefile script and simply use configure to do
the symbol replacement of @INCLUDE_RULES@, like it is done in apr.
The httpd way of doing it is bogus. That was on the long list
of things to do for the single-build system.
....Roy
Re: Worker MPM on BSD/OS
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 11:40:50PM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> >
> > > PS: I did get the thing to compile and run (worker MPM), but when I ran ab
> > > against it, the server just sat there doing a poll and ab eventually timed
> > > out. I'm recompiling now with prefork to see what happens...
> >
> > Prefork works beautifully on BSD/OS... don't know what was up with worker.
> > Maybe it was my imagination. I'll look into it more later.
>
> Must be my imagination. For a second I thought threaded was broken, too,
> but then it magically started working. Oh well. I'm calling this case
> closed for now... I've got other things I need to work on.
>
2.0.28 for testing. I love to see apache 2.0 Beta myself.
> --Cliff
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Cliff Woolley
> cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
> Charlottesville, VA
>
>
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: Worker MPM on BSD/OS
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 November 2001 01:28 am, Martin Kraemer wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 11:40:50PM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > > Must be my imagination. For a second I thought threaded was broken, too,
> > > but then it magically started working. Oh well. I'm calling this case
> > > closed for now... I've got other things I need to work on.
> >
> > Oh, so threaded works on BSD/OS? Didn't get it to run on FreeBSD yet.
>
> FreeBSD doesn't have a working thread implementation, does BSD/OS?
I was having a really hard time telling whether it was working or not.
I'm leaning toward not, because on both the server would just hang... some
of the time. I thought it was all the time, but then I tried it one last
time with threaded (having not changed anything) and it magically worked.
Sticking with prefork on BSD/OS is probably advisable.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: Worker MPM on BSD/OS
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Wednesday 07 November 2001 01:28 am, Martin Kraemer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 11:40:50PM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > Must be my imagination. For a second I thought threaded was broken, too,
> > but then it magically started working. Oh well. I'm calling this case
> > closed for now... I've got other things I need to work on.
>
> Oh, so threaded works on BSD/OS? Didn't get it to run on FreeBSD yet.
FreeBSD doesn't have a working thread implementation, does BSD/OS?
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Worker MPM on BSD/OS
Posted by Martin Kraemer <Ma...@Fujitsu-Siemens.com>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 11:40:50PM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> Must be my imagination. For a second I thought threaded was broken, too,
> but then it magically started working. Oh well. I'm calling this case
> closed for now... I've got other things I need to work on.
Oh, so threaded works on BSD/OS? Didn't get it to run on FreeBSD yet.
Martin
--
<Ma...@Fujitsu-Siemens.com> | Fujitsu Siemens
Fon: +49-89-636-46021, FAX: +49-89-636-47655 | 81730 Munich, Germany
Re: Worker MPM on BSD/OS
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>
> > PS: I did get the thing to compile and run (worker MPM), but when I ran ab
> > against it, the server just sat there doing a poll and ab eventually timed
> > out. I'm recompiling now with prefork to see what happens...
>
> Prefork works beautifully on BSD/OS... don't know what was up with worker.
> Maybe it was my imagination. I'll look into it more later.
Must be my imagination. For a second I thought threaded was broken, too,
but then it magically started working. Oh well. I'm calling this case
closed for now... I've got other things I need to work on.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Worker MPM on BSD/OS
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> PS: I did get the thing to compile and run (worker MPM), but when I ran ab
> against it, the server just sat there doing a poll and ab eventually timed
> out. I'm recompiling now with prefork to see what happens...
Prefork works beautifully on BSD/OS... don't know what was up with worker.
Maybe it was my imagination. I'll look into it more later.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> Looks like apr-util's configure.in is actually to blame... should have
> this nailed down shortly.
Okay, well that problem's taken care of. Next problem is that if you
rerun configure without deleting the 0-byte bsd_makefile file in the
top-level directory first, the build/bsd_makefile script thinks it's
already been run, so it doesn't, and build/rules.mk gets written in sysv
format by configure that second time around.
Anybody have a good idea how to fix that problem? It's much less critical
than the earlier one, but it'd be nice to fix it. Sascha?
--Cliff
PS: I did get the thing to compile and run (worker MPM), but when I ran ab
against it, the server just sat there doing a poll and ab eventually timed
out. I'm recompiling now with prefork to see what happens...
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> Specifically, the Makefiles in apr-util are not getting converted to
> bsd-make flavor, which is why make doesn't work.
Looks like apr-util's configure.in is actually to blame... should have
this nailed down shortly.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
BSD Makefiles (was Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available)
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, The Doctor wrote:
> > > > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is
> > > > that we force somebody to use a specific version of make. We
> > > > should only be using portable make commands. If we can't do
> > > > that, then we should only convert to BSD/OS make if the build is
> > > > using that make.
> > >
> > > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
> > > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
> >
> > It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
>
> Please fix. I am willing to assist.
Okay, so I've been looking into this (thanks for the account), and I'm
starting to see the problem. Looks like our build/bsd_makefile and
build/sysv_makefile scripts are doing a halfass job, and only SOME of the
Makefiles are getting converted in either direction.
Specifically, the Makefiles in apr-util are not getting converted to
bsd-make flavor, which is why make doesn't work.
But the rest ARE converted, which is why gmake doesn't work; the
build/sysv_makefile script doesn't help either, because it misses some
while converting them back, so even running that doesn't let you use
gmake.
A quick and dirty hack of making build/sysv_makefile and
build/bsd_makefile do recursive searches for Makefiles to convert makes
the thing compile correctly, but then again that breaks all the magic
that's trying to happen behind the scenes with build/fastgen.sh and all.
I'm still trying to figure out how this is supposed to work.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 09:37:11AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 November 2001 09:23 am, The Doctor wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:34:37AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > > > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> > > >
> > > > The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> > > > that platform.
> > >
> > > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> > > force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be
> > > using portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only
> > > convert to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
> > >
> > > Ryan
> >
> > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
> >
> > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
>
> It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
>
> Ryan
>
Please fix. I am willing to assist.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 09:37:11AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 November 2001 09:23 am, The Doctor wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:34:37AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > > > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> > > >
> > > > The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> > > > that platform.
> > >
> > > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> > > force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be
> > > using portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only
> > > convert to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
> > >
> > > Ryan
> >
> > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
> >
> > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
>
> It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
>
> Ryan
>
Please fix. I am willing to assist.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Sascha Schumann <sa...@schumann.cx>.
> > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
Not really, it just hardcodes values for various
operating-systems and breaks hard, if it encounters an
unknown OS. Apache 2.0 is much more flexible in supporting
OSes it has not heard of, if they provide common APIs or if
they are similar to another OS (e.g. FreeBSD-4 becoming
FreeBSD-5).
> > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
>
> It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
Well, true. Considering all the Apache 2.x problems, I'd ask
you not to blow this out of proportion though. :)
- Sascha Experience IRCG
http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Sascha Schumann <sa...@schumann.cx>.
> > Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
Not really, it just hardcodes values for various
operating-systems and breaks hard, if it encounters an
unknown OS. Apache 2.0 is much more flexible in supporting
OSes it has not heard of, if they provide common APIs or if
they are similar to another OS (e.g. FreeBSD-4 becoming
FreeBSD-5).
> > Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
>
> It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
Well, true. Considering all the Apache 2.x problems, I'd ask
you not to blow this out of proportion though. :)
- Sascha Experience IRCG
http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Tuesday 06 November 2001 09:23 am, The Doctor wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:34:37AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> > >
> > > The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> > > that platform.
> >
> > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> > force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be
> > using portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only
> > convert to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
> >
> > Ryan
>
> Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
>
> Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Tuesday 06 November 2001 09:23 am, The Doctor wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:34:37AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> > >
> > > The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> > > that platform.
> >
> > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> > force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be
> > using portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only
> > convert to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
> >
> > Ryan
>
> Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
>
> Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
It has to be. If it isn't done for Apache 2.x, then Apache 2.x is broken.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, The Doctor wrote:
> > Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> > force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be using
> > portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only convert
> > to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
>
> Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
> Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
Actually 1.x is not platform agnostic... it's just that a lot of effort
went into making it look that way from the outside. 2.0 is far more
platform agnostic than 1.x could ever be. We obviously have some issues
with make on BSD/OS that we need to look into, but that's fixable.
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:34:37AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> >
> > The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> > that platform.
>
> Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be using
> portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only convert
> to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
>
> Ryan
>
Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:34:37AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> >
> > The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> > that platform.
>
> Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
> force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be using
> portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only convert
> to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
>
> Ryan
>
Ryan the beauty of Apache 1.X is that it is platform agnostic.
Can it be done for Apache 2.X?
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
>
> The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> that platform.
Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be using
portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only convert
to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Tuesday 06 November 2001 08:18 am, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > PLease read, I DID use gmake!
>
> The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
> that platform.
Wait a second. That is bogus. What we have essentially done, is that we
force somebody to use a specific version of make. We should only be using
portable make commands. If we can't do that, then we should only convert
to BSD/OS make if the build is using that make.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Sascha Schumann <sa...@schumann.cx>.
> PLease read, I DID use gmake!
The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
that platform.
- Sascha Experience IRCG
http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Sascha Schumann <sa...@schumann.cx>.
> PLease read, I DID use gmake!
The Makefiles are converted to a BSD/OS-specific format on
that platform.
- Sascha Experience IRCG
http://schumann.cx/ http://schumann.cx/ircg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 10:27:08PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> > Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
> >
> >
> > Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> > Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> > Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> > exit
>
> Use gmake.
>
PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> --
> Daniel Stone <da...@sfarc.net>
> <Robot101> let me clarify
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 10:27:08PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> > Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
> >
> >
> > Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> > "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> > Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> > Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> > doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> > exit
>
> Use gmake.
>
PLease read, I DID use gmake!
> --
> Daniel Stone <da...@sfarc.net>
> <Robot101> let me clarify
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Daniel Stone <da...@sfarc.net>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
>
>
> Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> exit
Use gmake.
--
Daniel Stone <da...@sfarc.net>
<Robot101> let me clarify
<Robot101> FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Daniel Stone <da...@sfarc.net>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 07:22:46PM -0700, The Doctor wrote:
> Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
>
>
> Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
> "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
> "/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
> Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
> Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
> doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
> exit
Use gmake.
--
Daniel Stone <da...@sfarc.net>
<Robot101> let me clarify
<Robot101> FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
exit
Script done on Mon Nov 5 19:18:45 2001
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 05 November 2001 05:24 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:24:45PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> > > ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> > > running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> > > vote for beta.
> >
> > What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
> > configure when I try to build the tree.
> >
> > Did they get removed during the rolling?
> >
> > Going to continue on. -- justin
>
> All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
> however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
>
> Ryan
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 05 November 2001 05:24 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
> > configure when I try to build the tree.
>
> All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause
> problems however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
Yep. We can stop deleting them now for httpd-2.0 if we want. The main
reason we deleted it in the past was because of the massive vhtest
build tree that was in 1.3. Our current test trees are much cleaner.
....Roy
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:56:07PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
> > however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
>
> Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> on to 2.0.28?
>
> Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
>
Any chance you can unbreak the BSD/OS unbuild while at it?
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Greg Ames <gr...@remulak.net>.
"Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
>
> > Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> > on to 2.0.28?
>
> Do a re-roll -- the code hasn't changed,
Done & available in the usual place, with the test directories left
intact.
Greg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Greg Ames <gr...@remulak.net>.
"Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
>
> > Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> > on to 2.0.28?
>
> Do a re-roll -- the code hasn't changed,
OK, coming shortly. In the mean time, I'll erase the existing 2.0.27
tarballs.
Greg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@ebuilt.com>.
> Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
> on to 2.0.28?
Do a re-roll -- the code hasn't changed,
....Roy
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
> however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
on to 2.0.28?
Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by The Doctor <do...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>.
Go ahead and flame me for this but BSD/OS 4.2 Current produces:
Script started on Mon Nov 5 19:18:30 2001
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ make
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 57: Need an operator
"/usr/source/httpd-2_0_27/build/rules.mk", line 255: Need an operator
Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ gmake
Makefile:32: *** missing separator. Stop.
doctor.nl2k.ab.ca//usr/source/httpd-2_0_27$ exit
exit
Script done on Mon Nov 5 19:18:45 2001
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Monday 05 November 2001 05:24 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:24:45PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> > > ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> > > running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> > > vote for beta.
> >
> > What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
> > configure when I try to build the tree.
> >
> > Did they get removed during the rolling?
> >
> > Going to continue on. -- justin
>
> All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
> however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
>
> Ryan
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Lest we forget on 11 Nov 2001
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:29:59PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
> however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
Can we do a re-roll then, or do we need to toss this tag and move
on to 2.0.28?
Other than this, the tarball builds fine on Linux 2.4. -- justin
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Monday 05 November 2001 05:24 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:24:45PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> > ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> > running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> > vote for beta.
>
> What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
> configure when I try to build the tree.
>
> Did they get removed during the rolling?
>
> Going to continue on. -- justin
All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Monday 05 November 2001 05:24 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:24:45PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> > ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> > running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> > vote for beta.
>
> What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
> configure when I try to build the tree.
>
> Did they get removed during the rolling?
>
> Going to continue on. -- justin
All test/ directories are deleted as part of rolling. This will cause problems
however, because we run buildconf before we remove the dirs.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:24:45PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> vote for beta.
What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
configure when I try to build the tree.
Did they get removed during the rolling?
Going to continue on. -- justin
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
On Monday 05 November 2001 03:40 pm, Greg Ames wrote:
> Greg Ames wrote:
> > ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> > running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> > vote for beta.
>
> I did have one little glitch with the docs that we should fix. You run
> docs/manual/expand.pl as part of the roll procedure to expand the SSIs,
> so people can read the manual without SSI. It only can handle one level
> of include. But in the docs/manual/faq directory, we now go two levels
> deep (index.html -> support.html -> header/footer.html). I circumvented
> this by running the script twice before rolling the tarballs.
>
> Also, there still are 2.0.25 tarballs out there. Nuke 'em?
Move them to old.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Greg Ames <gr...@remulak.net>.
Greg Ames wrote:
>
> ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> vote for beta.
>
I did have one little glitch with the docs that we should fix. You run
docs/manual/expand.pl as part of the roll procedure to expand the SSIs,
so people can read the manual without SSI. It only can handle one level
of include. But in the docs/manual/faq directory, we now go two levels
deep (index.html -> support.html -> header/footer.html). I circumvented
this by running the script twice before rolling the tarballs.
Also, there still are 2.0.25 tarballs out there. Nuke 'em?
Greg
Re: httpd 2.0.27 tarballs are available
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:24:45PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
> ...in the usual spot ( httpd://dev.apache.org/dist/ ). This has been
> running smoothly on daedalus since Friday. Please download, test, and
> vote for beta.
What happened to the files in modules/test? I get an error from
configure when I try to build the tree.
Did they get removed during the rolling?
Going to continue on. -- justin