You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@devsys.jaguNET.com> on 1999/12/01 01:48:34 UTC

Re: APR leaking HAVE_* macros

Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> 
> Nothing in Apache should be including apr_config.h and nothing in APR
> should be including Apache's config.h.  When you have two separate
> autoconf trees, they need to be kept separate.  If they are not to be kept
> separate, they should not be two separate autoconf trees.  It is as simple
> as that.  If you really want one to include the other's config.h file,
> then we need to remove the autoconf stuff from APR and have the top-level
> autoconf script handle it and only do a config.m4 for APR.
> 

I think the concern might be that APR assumes one setup and Apache
assumes another. One example would be APR prefering select and Apache
prefering poll. This isn't a _good_ example, because such details are
really under APR's hat. Another might be the use of the dbm_open()
function. APR might use the ndbm version, but Apache may choose
the one in DB. It's all how the "preferences" in the autoconf's
are determined. 

There's very little that they need to share though... In the best
of worlds, only APR would have an autoconf. Apache would just use
generic APR functions and so wouldn't need to worry about it :) :) :)

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
                "Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"

Re: APR leaking HAVE_* macros

Posted by ra...@apache.org.
> There's very little that they need to share though... In the best
> of worlds, only APR would have an autoconf. Apache would just use
> generic APR functions and so wouldn't need to worry about it :) :) :)

You need more smileys there.  But yes, there really shouldn't be any
crossover.  But even if there is, it should be possible.  For your dbm
example, if APR actually had anything to do with dbm, it should be allowed
to choose which dbm lib it talked to and Apache modules should be free to
choose another.

I think Ryan, Manoj and I worked it out offline.

-Rasmus