You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to cvs@httpd.apache.org by pq...@apache.org on 2005/03/20 06:26:26 UTC
svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Author: pquerna
Date: Sat Mar 19 21:26:22 2005
New Revision: 158303
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=158303
Log:
Test for APR and APR-Util one directory bellow httpd too. I like not having to put them inside srclib.
Modified:
httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf?view=diff&r1=158302&r2=158303
==============================================================================
--- httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf Sat Mar 19 21:26:22 2005
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@
# set a couple of defaults for where we should be looking for our support libs.
# can be overridden with --with-apr=[dir] and --with-apr-util=[dir]
-apr_src_dir=srclib/apr
-apu_src_dir=srclib/apr-util
+apr_src_dir="srclib/apr ../apr"
+apu_src_dir="srclib/apr-util ../apr-util"
while test $# -gt 0
do
@@ -52,10 +52,22 @@
#
should_exit=0
+apr_found=0
+apu_found=0
-if [ ! -d "$apr_src_dir" -o ! -f "$apr_src_dir/build/apr_common.m4" ]; then
+for dir in $apr_src_dir
+do
+ if [ -d "${dir}" -a -f "${dir}/build/apr_common.m4" ]; then
+ echo "found apr source: ${dir}"
+ apr_src_dir=$dir
+ apr_found=1
+ break
+ fi
+done
+
+if [ $apr_found -lt 1 ]; then
echo ""
- echo "You don't have a copy of the apr source in $apr_src_dir. "
+ echo "You don't have a copy of the apr source in srclib/apr. "
echo "Please get the source using the following instructions,"
echo "or specify the location of the source with "
echo "--with-apr=[path to apr] :"
@@ -64,9 +76,20 @@
echo ""
should_exit=1
fi
-if [ ! -d "$apu_src_dir" -o ! -f "$apu_src_dir/Makefile.in" ]; then
+
+for dir in $apu_src_dir
+do
+ if [ -d "${dir}" -a -f "${dir}/Makefile.in" ]; then
+ echo "found apr-util source: ${dir}"
+ apu_src_dir=$dir
+ apu_found=1
+ break
+ fi
+done
+
+if [ $apu_found -lt 1 ]; then
echo ""
- echo "You don't have a copy of the apr-util source in $apu_src_dir. "
+ echo "You don't have a copy of the apr-util source in srclib/apr-util. "
echo "Please get one the source using the following instructions, "
echo "or specify the location of the source with "
echo "--with-apr-util=[path to apr-util]:"
buildconf.nice, WAS: Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Tuesday, March 22, 2005 3:22 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr."
> <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
>> Of course! Now I'm on the same page with you. Actually,
>> I believe a buildconf.nice is a better solution (for reasons
>> in my other note.) We really have no say-so about what is
>> sitting in the directory above our httpd snapshot.
>
> It only matters if the directory is present and contains the files we
> need. I just think a buildconf.nice would be overkill here. -- justin
I find myself agreeing with that...
Sander
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 04:02 PM 3/22/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>--On Tuesday, March 22, 2005 3:22 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
>It only matters if the directory is present and contains the files we need. I just think a buildconf.nice would be overkill here. -- justin
Are we certain ../apr/ doesn't contain apr 0.9? If it does, will
we proceed with alternatives?
If so I can drop my objection, however silly I still think this is :)
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On Tuesday, March 22, 2005 3:22 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr."
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Of course! Now I'm on the same page with you. Actually,
> I believe a buildconf.nice is a better solution (for reasons
> in my other note.) We really have no say-so about what is
> sitting in the directory above our httpd snapshot.
It only matters if the directory is present and contains the files we need.
I just think a buildconf.nice would be overkill here. -- justin
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 11:11 PM 3/21/2005, Paul Querna wrote:
>Yep, i was tried of passing --with-apr and --with-apr-util to ./buildconf -- this has nothing to do with ./config.nice, and I thought making a ./buildconf.nice would of been a little excessive.
Of course! Now I'm on the same page with you. Actually,
I believe a buildconf.nice is a better solution (for reasons
in my other note.) We really have no say-so about what is
sitting in the directory above our httpd snapshot.
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by Paul Querna <ch...@force-elite.com>.
Sander Striker wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> At 11:26 PM 3/19/2005, pquerna@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>> Author: pquerna
>>> Date: Sat Mar 19 21:26:22 2005
>>> New Revision: 158303
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=158303
>>> Log:
>>> Test for APR and APR-Util one directory bellow httpd too. I like not
>>> having to put them inside srclib.
>>
>>
>>
>> <grumf> I'm not keen on this change, since it complicates things
>> unnecessarily - some day we discover a tag and roll organized like
>> this out of the blue?
>
>
> What do you mean? I thought that the future goal was to unbundle apr*
> in httpd releases? So you're afraid of tagged and rolled (actually only
> rolled, since tags don't include apr* anyway) tarballs that don't
> contain srclib/apr* before we actually wish to unbundle? Isn't that
> the RM's responsibility?
>
My feeling is that it is the RM's responsibility. It does tell you
which APR/APR-Util path it is using, so it doesn't leave you completely
clueless.
>> Does config.nice not do what you want? Especially if you rename
>> it config.me with all your absolute options that you don't tweak?
>
>
> I don't see how that would help towards the unbundling goal. Also for
> development purposes it's way more convenient to allow apr* next to
> httpd as to require it be in srclib/.
Yep, i was tried of passing --with-apr and --with-apr-util to
./buildconf -- this has nothing to do with ./config.nice, and I thought
making a ./buildconf.nice would of been a little excessive.
-Paul
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> At 11:26 PM 3/19/2005, pquerna@apache.org wrote:
>
>>Author: pquerna
>>Date: Sat Mar 19 21:26:22 2005
>>New Revision: 158303
>>
>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=158303
>>Log:
>>Test for APR and APR-Util one directory bellow httpd too. I like not having to put them inside srclib.
>
>
> <grumf> I'm not keen on this change, since it complicates things
> unnecessarily - some day we discover a tag and roll organized like
> this out of the blue?
What do you mean? I thought that the future goal was to unbundle apr*
in httpd releases? So you're afraid of tagged and rolled (actually only
rolled, since tags don't include apr* anyway) tarballs that don't
contain srclib/apr* before we actually wish to unbundle? Isn't that
the RM's responsibility?
> Does config.nice not do what you want? Especially if you rename
> it config.me with all your absolute options that you don't tweak?
I don't see how that would help towards the unbundling goal. Also for
development purposes it's way more convenient to allow apr* next to
httpd as to require it be in srclib/.
Sander
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 06:38 PM 3/21/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>Since moving to Subversion, having apr and apr-util at the same level as httpd
>is my typical working copy layout, so I'm definitely +1 on this change.
>srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util don't really make sense anymore, IMO. -- justin
Yup, my srclib contains symlinks to apr-1.1 etc. But they are
symlinks since my tree containing httpd-2.1, -2.0, -1.3 also
contains apr-0.9, 1.0, 1.1 etc.
Given than apr-1.0.1 release unpacks as apr-1.0.1 I'm not that
comfortable making 'apr' and 'apr-util' path assumptions for
the user. I'd be much -more- comfortable assuming ../apr-1 and
../apr-util-1 assumptions.
FWIW the old layout didn't work that well under cvs, either.
Checkout on a tag tried to inflict the same tag on apr etc.
Bill
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:19:56PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> <grumf> I'm not keen on this change, since it complicates things
> unnecessarily - some day we discover a tag and roll organized like
> this out of the blue?
>
> Does config.nice not do what you want? Especially if you rename
> it config.me with all your absolute options that you don't tweak?
Since moving to Subversion, having apr and apr-util at the same level as httpd
is my typical working copy layout, so I'm definitely +1 on this change.
srclib/apr and srclib/apr-util don't really make sense anymore, IMO. -- justin
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 11:26 PM 3/19/2005, pquerna@apache.org wrote:
>Author: pquerna
>Date: Sat Mar 19 21:26:22 2005
>New Revision: 158303
>
>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=158303
>Log:
>Test for APR and APR-Util one directory bellow httpd too. I like not having to put them inside srclib.
<grumf> I'm not keen on this change, since it complicates things
unnecessarily - some day we discover a tag and roll organized like
this out of the blue?
Does config.nice not do what you want? Especially if you rename
it config.me with all your absolute options that you don't tweak?
Re: svn commit: r158303 - httpd/httpd/trunk/buildconf
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 11:26 PM 3/19/2005, pquerna@apache.org wrote:
>Author: pquerna
>Date: Sat Mar 19 21:26:22 2005
>New Revision: 158303
>
>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=158303
>Log:
>Test for APR and APR-Util one directory bellow httpd too. I like not having to put them inside srclib.
<grumf> I'm not keen on this change, since it complicates things
unnecessarily - some day we discover a tag and roll organized like
this out of the blue?
Does config.nice not do what you want? Especially if you rename
it config.me with all your absolute options that you don't tweak?