You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be> on 2002/06/19 20:07:18 UTC
How much effort to get Apache working with Mingw?
Hello,
I was thinking to get Apache compiled with Mingw, but it seems like all
your instructions are based on MVC++ (which I don't really want to pay
for). Do you know how much would be needed to do for Apache to work with
Mingw? Perl uses another make called "dmake" and has a separate makefile,
but I'm not sure if that would be needed. I guess in theory just changing
the compiler name to gcc would be enough, but that's in theory of course :)
Has anyone ever tinkered with this? It would be a great alternative for
win32 platforms, because it would allow more people to compile themselves.
Anyway, the real reason I'm asking is because I want to do mod_perl work
with Mingw, which would make it easier to contribute. So I'm wondering: as
Mingw uses the same runtime library as MS Visual C (MSVCRT) under the hood,
would it be possible to compile DSO modules with Mingw and make them run
with binary distributions of Apache?
Oh yeah: I'm talking 1.3 and 2.0 here, the best would be both.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
Re: Apache/Mingw Build Hackathon 19:00Z Jul 1 @ #apr
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 18:57 25.06.2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>>Is gnu make ported to mingw as well? If so, this intersects neatly with some
>>work related research deadlines I have coming up :-)
>
>I have a make running here, but I think I saw somewhere it's pretty
>crippled. I can't seem to find it back though, so maybe I was dreaming!
Of course, when I think about it, it's pretty awkward running a normal make
someplace that doesn't have "sh", because many commands might not work.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
Re: Apache/Mingw Build Hackathon 19:00Z Jul 1 @ #apr
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 17:18 25.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>At 09:20 AM 6/25/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>
>>Hi again Bill,
>>
>>At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
>>>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr
>>>channel
>>>to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
>>>working
>>>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
>>>
>>>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
>>>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
>>
>>So when should we do this? From thursday evening (CET time :) tothe 4th
>>of July I'm free most of the time. Then it's summer vacation :)
>
>Ok... CDT[US] here, so I'm 7 hours behind you. If we said, say, 1:00
>here, that's
>8p.m. out by you and those PDT folks who are interested could join at
>11am. Guess
>that would make about 19:00-20:00 Zulu a pretty good hour.
>
>Anyone interested in Mingw hacking is welcome to join us on
>irc.openprojects.net
>#apr channel.
Great!
>My daytime is somewhat limited this week, with bughunting and work related
>coding deadlines. Monday next week should work great..
>
>>Anyway, I've been looking into the subject a little when I have had the
>>time: for me it seems like the most reasonable approach would be to
>>forget the libtool things, as it's still imperfect :( but rather treat
>>Mingw GCC as just another windows compiler, and port the win32 makefiles
>>to that. This is the path taken in Perl which has very good Mingw support
>>IMO. I've just been looking at why Perl uses dmake as opposed to nmake
>>for the Mingw build before trying to modify the makefiles to any extent.
>>(on another note, my nmake downloaded from an MS site complains when
>>looking at the Apache makefiles.. the '::'s seem to be bugging it.. weird).
>
>I'd suggest a quick trip through the makefiles using .awk. The question
>is, which
>makefiles? I've considered for a while just creating a simplified [some
>comment
>notation] structure and script to populate makefile's from
>makefile.in's. Or populate
>project files for VisualStudio, or whatever other IDEs folks want to plug in.
>
>Is gnu make ported to mingw as well? If so, this intersects neatly with some
>work related research deadlines I have coming up :-)
I have a make running here, but I think I saw somewhere it's pretty
crippled. I can't seem to find it back though, so maybe I was dreaming!
>The right attack is probably to get apr building independent of everything
>else, then roll onto apr-util (trivial) and httpd (not as trivial). But
>apr/build
>is sort of the new cornerstone of the build system, since httpd borrows
>much of it's decision making from apr who already ran or collected most
>m4/autoconf variables. We might just need to create some .gw* stubs
>out there for 'generic windows', e.g. bcc or gcc.
A lot of work to do it seems, let's just hope it goes well enough :)
>>Anyway, as Mingw exposes the Win32 API and links to MSVCRT.DLL I think
>>the win32 code should be able to run cleanly. Or atleast hope so :)
>
>And that is the hope :-) Worst case: a recent PSDK to get the headers we
>need. But the other question is; can gnu c help us with __declspec() syntax
>or will we need to punt some exports? Brian Havard and Jeff Trawick did some
>great work on that for their respective platforms, I suspect we can borrow
>liberally here, if we need to set up our exports in that manner.
No idea, sorry.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
Re: Apache/Mingw Build Hackathon 19:00Z Jul 1 @ #apr
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 17:18 25.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>At 09:20 AM 6/25/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>
>>Hi again Bill,
>>
>>At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
>>>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr
>>>channel
>>>to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
>>>working
>>>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
>>>
>>>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
>>>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
>>
>>So when should we do this? From thursday evening (CET time :) tothe 4th
>>of July I'm free most of the time. Then it's summer vacation :)
>
>Ok... CDT[US] here, so I'm 7 hours behind you. If we said, say, 1:00
>here, that's
>8p.m. out by you and those PDT folks who are interested could join at
>11am. Guess
>that would make about 19:00-20:00 Zulu a pretty good hour.
>
>Anyone interested in Mingw hacking is welcome to join us on
>irc.openprojects.net
>#apr channel.
Great!
>My daytime is somewhat limited this week, with bughunting and work related
>coding deadlines. Monday next week should work great..
>
>>Anyway, I've been looking into the subject a little when I have had the
>>time: for me it seems like the most reasonable approach would be to
>>forget the libtool things, as it's still imperfect :( but rather treat
>>Mingw GCC as just another windows compiler, and port the win32 makefiles
>>to that. This is the path taken in Perl which has very good Mingw support
>>IMO. I've just been looking at why Perl uses dmake as opposed to nmake
>>for the Mingw build before trying to modify the makefiles to any extent.
>>(on another note, my nmake downloaded from an MS site complains when
>>looking at the Apache makefiles.. the '::'s seem to be bugging it.. weird).
>
>I'd suggest a quick trip through the makefiles using .awk. The question
>is, which
>makefiles? I've considered for a while just creating a simplified [some
>comment
>notation] structure and script to populate makefile's from
>makefile.in's. Or populate
>project files for VisualStudio, or whatever other IDEs folks want to plug in.
>
>Is gnu make ported to mingw as well? If so, this intersects neatly with some
>work related research deadlines I have coming up :-)
I have a make running here, but I think I saw somewhere it's pretty
crippled. I can't seem to find it back though, so maybe I was dreaming!
>The right attack is probably to get apr building independent of everything
>else, then roll onto apr-util (trivial) and httpd (not as trivial). But
>apr/build
>is sort of the new cornerstone of the build system, since httpd borrows
>much of it's decision making from apr who already ran or collected most
>m4/autoconf variables. We might just need to create some .gw* stubs
>out there for 'generic windows', e.g. bcc or gcc.
A lot of work to do it seems, let's just hope it goes well enough :)
>>Anyway, as Mingw exposes the Win32 API and links to MSVCRT.DLL I think
>>the win32 code should be able to run cleanly. Or atleast hope so :)
>
>And that is the hope :-) Worst case: a recent PSDK to get the headers we
>need. But the other question is; can gnu c help us with __declspec() syntax
>or will we need to punt some exports? Brian Havard and Jeff Trawick did some
>great work on that for their respective platforms, I suspect we can borrow
>liberally here, if we need to set up our exports in that manner.
No idea, sorry.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
Apache/Mingw Build Hackathon 19:00Z Jul 1 @ #apr
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 09:20 AM 6/25/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>Hi again Bill,
>
>At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
>>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr channel
>>to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
>>working
>>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
>>
>>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
>>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
>
>So when should we do this? From thursday evening (CET time :) tothe 4th of
>July I'm free most of the time. Then it's summer vacation :)
Ok... CDT[US] here, so I'm 7 hours behind you. If we said, say, 1:00 here,
that's
8p.m. out by you and those PDT folks who are interested could join at
11am. Guess
that would make about 19:00-20:00 Zulu a pretty good hour.
Anyone interested in Mingw hacking is welcome to join us on
irc.openprojects.net
#apr channel.
My daytime is somewhat limited this week, with bughunting and work related
coding deadlines. Monday next week should work great..
>Anyway, I've been looking into the subject a little when I have had the
>time: for me it seems like the most reasonable approach would be to forget
>the libtool things, as it's still imperfect :( but rather treat Mingw GCC
>as just another windows compiler, and port the win32 makefiles to that.
>This is the path taken in Perl which has very good Mingw support IMO. I've
>just been looking at why Perl uses dmake as opposed to nmake for the Mingw
>build before trying to modify the makefiles to any extent. (on another
>note, my nmake downloaded from an MS site complains when looking at the
>Apache makefiles.. the '::'s seem to be bugging it.. weird).
I'd suggest a quick trip through the makefiles using .awk. The question
is, which
makefiles? I've considered for a while just creating a simplified [some
comment
notation] structure and script to populate makefile's from
makefile.in's. Or populate
project files for VisualStudio, or whatever other IDEs folks want to plug in.
Is gnu make ported to mingw as well? If so, this intersects neatly with some
work related research deadlines I have coming up :-)
The right attack is probably to get apr building independent of everything
else, then roll onto apr-util (trivial) and httpd (not as trivial). But
apr/build
is sort of the new cornerstone of the build system, since httpd borrows
much of it's decision making from apr who already ran or collected most
m4/autoconf variables. We might just need to create some .gw* stubs
out there for 'generic windows', e.g. bcc or gcc.
>Anyway, as Mingw exposes the Win32 API and links to MSVCRT.DLL I think the
>win32 code should be able to run cleanly. Or atleast hope so :)
And that is the hope :-) Worst case: a recent PSDK to get the headers we
need. But the other question is; can gnu c help us with __declspec() syntax
or will we need to punt some exports? Brian Havard and Jeff Trawick did some
great work on that for their respective platforms, I suspect we can borrow
liberally here, if we need to set up our exports in that manner.
Bill
Apache/Mingw Build Hackathon 19:00Z Jul 1 @ #apr
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 09:20 AM 6/25/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>Hi again Bill,
>
>At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
>>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr channel
>>to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
>>working
>>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
>>
>>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
>>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
>
>So when should we do this? From thursday evening (CET time :) tothe 4th of
>July I'm free most of the time. Then it's summer vacation :)
Ok... CDT[US] here, so I'm 7 hours behind you. If we said, say, 1:00 here,
that's
8p.m. out by you and those PDT folks who are interested could join at
11am. Guess
that would make about 19:00-20:00 Zulu a pretty good hour.
Anyone interested in Mingw hacking is welcome to join us on
irc.openprojects.net
#apr channel.
My daytime is somewhat limited this week, with bughunting and work related
coding deadlines. Monday next week should work great..
>Anyway, I've been looking into the subject a little when I have had the
>time: for me it seems like the most reasonable approach would be to forget
>the libtool things, as it's still imperfect :( but rather treat Mingw GCC
>as just another windows compiler, and port the win32 makefiles to that.
>This is the path taken in Perl which has very good Mingw support IMO. I've
>just been looking at why Perl uses dmake as opposed to nmake for the Mingw
>build before trying to modify the makefiles to any extent. (on another
>note, my nmake downloaded from an MS site complains when looking at the
>Apache makefiles.. the '::'s seem to be bugging it.. weird).
I'd suggest a quick trip through the makefiles using .awk. The question
is, which
makefiles? I've considered for a while just creating a simplified [some
comment
notation] structure and script to populate makefile's from
makefile.in's. Or populate
project files for VisualStudio, or whatever other IDEs folks want to plug in.
Is gnu make ported to mingw as well? If so, this intersects neatly with some
work related research deadlines I have coming up :-)
The right attack is probably to get apr building independent of everything
else, then roll onto apr-util (trivial) and httpd (not as trivial). But
apr/build
is sort of the new cornerstone of the build system, since httpd borrows
much of it's decision making from apr who already ran or collected most
m4/autoconf variables. We might just need to create some .gw* stubs
out there for 'generic windows', e.g. bcc or gcc.
>Anyway, as Mingw exposes the Win32 API and links to MSVCRT.DLL I think the
>win32 code should be able to run cleanly. Or atleast hope so :)
And that is the hope :-) Worst case: a recent PSDK to get the headers we
need. But the other question is; can gnu c help us with __declspec() syntax
or will we need to punt some exports? Brian Havard and Jeff Trawick did some
great work on that for their respective platforms, I suspect we can borrow
liberally here, if we need to set up our exports in that manner.
Bill
Re: How much effort to get Apache working with Mingw?
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
Hi again Bill,
At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>Einar...
>
>This has been on my to-do for 3 years ;) Thanks for taking up the challenge.
>
>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr channel
>to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
>working
>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
>
>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
So when should we do this? From thursday evening (CET time :) tothe 4th of
July I'm free most of the time. Then it's summer vacation :)
Should we schedule something? Just tell me your timezone too, because we
don't want any disagreements about the time!
Anyway, I've been looking into the subject a little when I have had the
time: for me it seems like the most reasonable approach would be to forget
the libtool things, as it's still imperfect :( but rather treat Mingw GCC
as just another windows compiler, and port the win32 makefiles to that.
This is the path taken in Perl which has very good Mingw support IMO. I've
just been looking at why Perl uses dmake as opposed to nmake for the Mingw
build before trying to modify the makefiles to any extent. (on another
note, my nmake downloaded from an MS site complains when looking at the
Apache makefiles.. the '::'s seem to be bugging it.. weird).
Anyway, as Mingw exposes the Win32 API and links to MSVCRT.DLL I think the
win32 code should be able to run cleanly. Or atleast hope so :)
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
Re: How much effort to get Apache working with Mingw?
Posted by Albert Chin <ne...@thewrittenword.com>.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 11:20:36PM +0200, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
> At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
> >support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
>
> ...
>
> As for libtool etc etc... No idea, but I do indeed hope so! I'll try to
> take a look around..
Read the last two weeks of the libtool mailing list. There is someone
doing DLL builds with libtool on MingW that might be able to help you
with libtool issues.
--
albert chin (china@thewrittenword.com)
Re: How much effort to get Apache working with Mingw?
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>Einar...
>
>This has been on my to-do for 3 years ;) Thanks for taking up the challenge.
>
>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr channel
>to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
>working
>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
>
>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
I'm into anything and hope to be able to do as much as possible, although
I'm not too experienced with Apache hacking. My goal for this summer has
been to get mod_perl and Apache to work on as many varieties of windows as
possible, so heck I just want to try :) Anytime after next thursday is fine
with me.
As for libtool etc etc... No idea, but I do indeed hope so! I'll try to
take a look around..
Good to see someone else is interested in this!
>At 01:07 PM 6/19/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>>Hello,
>>
>>I was thinking to get Apache compiled with Mingw, but it seems like all
>>your instructions are based on MVC++ (which I don't really want to pay
>>for). Do you know how much would be needed to do for Apache to work with
>>Mingw? Perl uses another make called "dmake" and has a separate makefile,
>>but I'm not sure if that would be needed. I guess in theory just changing
>>the compiler name to gcc would be enough, but that's in theory of course
>>:) Has anyone ever tinkered with this? It would be a great alternative
>>for win32 platforms, because it would allow more people to compile themselves.
>>
>>Anyway, the real reason I'm asking is because I want to do mod_perl work
>>with Mingw, which would make it easier to contribute. So I'm wondering:
>>as Mingw uses the same runtime library as MS Visual C (MSVCRT) under the
>>hood, would it be possible to compile DSO modules with Mingw and make
>>them run with binary distributions of Apache?
>>
>>Oh yeah: I'm talking 1.3 and 2.0 here, the best would be both.
>>
>>--
>>Per Einar Ellefsen
>>per.einar@skynet.be
>
>
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
Re: Apache/Mingw Build Hackathon 19:00Z Jul 1 @ #apr
Posted by Mark Evenson <ev...@panix.com>.
"William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> writes:
> At 09:20 AM 6/25/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>
> >Hi again Bill,
> >
> >At 22:51 19.06.2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >>
> >>If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
> >>an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr channel
> >> to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn
> >> around working
> >>1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
> >>
> >>The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
> >>support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
> >
Does anyone know if anything happenened with this path? The situation with
the autoconf toolset has definately improved with the release of msys-DTK
package.
I find myself in the situation of needing to build native win32 apache and
mod_jk2 without access to the Microsoft compilers. It would seem that if
these changes were ever created, they were not folded back into the
apache/APR trees as working with MinGW 3.0rc4 / MSYS 1.0.1 chokes in
configuring 'srclib/apr' (first fails to find a threading model chasing
around for the non-existent pthread.h headers, then bails out after failing
to find any support shared memory).
I'm very new to both MinGW and the win32 environment in general, so any
information on whether attempting to build apache2 with MinGW would be an
effort that one would expect to work in the first place.
--
Mark Evenson <ev...@panix.com>
"A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there is
nothing to compare to it now."
Re: How much effort to get Apache working with Mingw?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Einar...
This has been on my to-do for 3 years ;) Thanks for taking up the challenge.
If we could set up an evening next week or over the weekend, perhaps we have
an informal Win32/mingw hackathon on irc://irc.openprojects.net/ #apr channel
to trade ideas with anyone interested in attacking this, and turn around
working
1.3 and 2.0 build methods.
The problem with mingw has been the lack of libtool/autoconf/automake/m4
support, but I'm hoping to hear that the situation has improved over time :)
Bill
At 01:07 PM 6/19/2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I was thinking to get Apache compiled with Mingw, but it seems like all
>your instructions are based on MVC++ (which I don't really want to pay
>for). Do you know how much would be needed to do for Apache to work with
>Mingw? Perl uses another make called "dmake" and has a separate makefile,
>but I'm not sure if that would be needed. I guess in theory just changing
>the compiler name to gcc would be enough, but that's in theory of course
>:) Has anyone ever tinkered with this? It would be a great alternative for
>win32 platforms, because it would allow more people to compile themselves.
>
>Anyway, the real reason I'm asking is because I want to do mod_perl work
>with Mingw, which would make it easier to contribute. So I'm wondering: as
>Mingw uses the same runtime library as MS Visual C (MSVCRT) under the
>hood, would it be possible to compile DSO modules with Mingw and make them
>run with binary distributions of Apache?
>
>Oh yeah: I'm talking 1.3 and 2.0 here, the best would be both.
>
>--
>Per Einar Ellefsen
>per.einar@skynet.be
>