Re: svn commit: r1241953 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/INSTALL

[Rainer Jung <ra...@kippdata.de>]

Hi Jim,

On 08.02.2012 17:01, jim@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jim
> Date: Wed Feb  8 16:01:34 2012
> New Revision: 1241953
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1241953&view=rev
> Log:
> remove -deps info from INSTALL
>
> Modified:
>      httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/INSTALL
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/INSTALL
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/INSTALL?rev=1241953&r1=1241952&r2=1241953&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/INSTALL (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/INSTALL Wed Feb  8 16:01:34 2012
> @@ -18,16 +18,18 @@
>                 quotes).
>
>               * Consider if you want to use a previously installed APR and
> -              APR-Util (such as those provided with many OSes) or if
> -              you need to use the APR and APR-Util from the
> -              httpd-2.4.x-deps.tar.gz tarball via ./configure's
> -              --with-included-apr option. This is required if you don't
> -              have the compiler which the system APR was built with.  It
> -              can also be advantageous if you are a developer who will be
> -              linking your code with Apache or using a debugger to step
> -              through server code, as it removes the possibility of
> -              version or compile-option mismatches with APR and APR-util
> -              code.
> +              APR-Util (such as those provided with many OSes) or if you
> +              need to use the APR and APR-Util from the apr.apache.org
> +              project. If the latter, download the latest versions and
> +              unpack them to ./srclib/apr and ./srclib/apr-util (no
> +              version numbers in the directory names) and use
> +              ./configure's --with-included-apr option. This is required
> +              if you don't have the compiler which the system APR was
> +              built with.  It can also be advantageous if you are a
> +              developer who will be linking your code with Apache or using
> +              a debugger to step through server code, as it removes the
> +              possibility of version or compile-option mismatches with APR
> +              and APR-util code.

Should this be ported byck to trunk? Or reverted from trunk? I lost 
track, what the final conclusions about the deps tarball was.

Regards,

Rainer