Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

Just in case someone wants those for Fedora Core 2, they can be had from
here:

ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/libapreq2/

You can download the RPMS for today's CVS snapshot too.

-- 
Bojan

Re: Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

New RPM releases, including apreq2-config, now available from the same
location:

ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/libapreq2/

-- 
Bojan

Re: Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

Quoting Joe Schaefer <jo...@sunstarsys.com>:

> Yup.  IMO it needs to go alongside apr-config.

I've already made the RPMS for 2.03_04 where I put apreq2-config in /usr/bin, by
directly installing it from the source directory into the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. I
have done the same for the CVS version from a few days back. I still need to
release both. Should be all done in the next couple of days. I'll keep you
posted.

> Actually I'm now having second thoughts about the value of --package-name.
> The issue I was trying to think about is that folks packaging rpm's and
> deb's will naturally put the perl glue into a separate package from
> libapreq2/mod_apreq, which means users might eventually have separate
> versions for the C and Perl API installed.  Down the road we may want
> the perl glue to demand a minimum libapreq2/mod_apreq version, which may
> be less than the current package number.  We should be able to do that
> through apreq2-config.
>
> I thought --package-name might help users here, but I don't see that
> anymore.  --package-version and --library-version are all that's really
> needed.  --package-name and --package-title should probably go away soon.

No worries. I'll keep an eye on it. For now, it'll just report whatever vanilla
package-name it has (i.e. I won't be changing anything).

With RPMS (and I would guess with Debian too), you can demand that Perl stuff
matches the version of C stuff, so there won't be any confusion there. It is
also very simple to do using Require in the RPM spec file. I'm not sure what's
in the spec file now, but I'll have look.

--
Bojan

Re: Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

As an FYI, if apreq2-config is used from the source directory, all paths will
start with that directory rather than the actual installation directories.
Meaning, anything linking to libapre2 will link into the source. Once source is
removed, programs that linked against the shared libraries will fail.

So, it is best that apreq2-config be installed in the correct location (e.g.
/usr/local/apache2/bin or /usr/bin), otherwise things won't work as expected.

Quoting Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>:

> Quoting Joe Schaefer <jo...@sunstarsys.com>:
>
> > ++Bojan!  I haven't looked over the actual contents, but in the future,
> > please make sure `apreq2-config --package-name` produces the correct
> > name of the rpm.  It's a new flag, and I'm expecting it'll be useful
> > for users if/when they encounter problems upgrading from one release to
> > another.
>
> While fiddling with apreq2-config, I've noticed that it doesn't actually get
> installed. I think it should end up in "bindir" after "make install". As it
> is,
> I have to forcefully install it there through the RPM spec file. Whoever is
> installing from source won't have access to it unless they keep the source.
>
> --
> Bojan
>
>


--
Bojan

Re: Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

Quoting Joe Schaefer <jo...@sunstarsys.com>:

> ++Bojan!  I haven't looked over the actual contents, but in the future,
> please make sure `apreq2-config --package-name` produces the correct
> name of the rpm.  It's a new flag, and I'm expecting it'll be useful
> for users if/when they encounter problems upgrading from one release to
> another.

While fiddling with apreq2-config, I've noticed that it doesn't actually get
installed. I think it should end up in "bindir" after "make install". As it is,
I have to forcefully install it there through the RPM spec file. Whoever is
installing from source won't have access to it unless they keep the source.

--
Bojan

Re: Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>]

Thanks. I'll work on that. At present, I don't think the RPM actually includes
anything that goes into /usr/bin (I just used the old spec with new tarballs).

Quoting Joe Schaefer <jo...@sunstarsys.com>:

> ++Bojan!  I haven't looked over the actual contents, but in the future,
> please make sure `apreq2-config --package-name` produces the correct
> name of the rpm.  It's a new flag, and I'm expecting it'll be useful
> for users if/when they encounter problems upgrading from one release to
> another.
>
> --
> Joe Schaefer
>
>


--
Bojan

Re: Fresh libapreq2 RPMS

[Joe Schaefer <jo...@sunstarsys.com>]

Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com> writes:

> Just in case someone wants those for Fedora Core 2, they can be had from
> here:
> 
> ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/libapreq2/
> 
> You can download the RPMS for today's CVS snapshot too.

++Bojan!  I haven't looked over the actual contents, but in the future,
please make sure `apreq2-config --package-name` produces the correct
name of the rpm.  It's a new flag, and I'm expecting it'll be useful
for users if/when they encounter problems upgrading from one release to
another.

-- 
Joe Schaefer