mod_so enabling....

["Victor J. Orlikowski" <v....@gte.net>]

As I said at the Con....
mod_so is not necessarily being enabled when needed...
The problem is put succinctly in the comment in config.m4, in
modules/mappers:
dnl ### this isn't going to work quite right because of ordering issues
dnl ### among the config.m4 files. it is possible that a *later* module
dnl ### is marked as shared (thus setting sharedobjs), so we won't see
dnl ### it here. we need to shift *this* config.m4 to be "last" or we
dnl ### need to find a different way to set up this default and module spec.

So, the implementer saw that a problem was coming here...

What I'm asking for is a general suggestion from clearer heads than
mine, as to what the Right Thing To Do (TM) is.

Do we wish to set that config.m4 to be the last used, or is there a
better suggestion?
If nothing better arises, I'll put in the quick hack.

Victor
-- 
Victor J. Orlikowski
======================
v.j.orlikowski@gte.net
orlikowski@apache.org
vjo@us.ibm.com

Re: mod_so enabling....

["Victor J. Orlikowski" <v....@gte.net>]

Ah. So make it last it is.
The problems with this are impractical (we could force a config.m4 to
come later than this one, but we are asking for trouble in that
instance), and re-working things to guarantee that this will be last
is not worth the time.
Fine. Will do.
If anyone has any serious objection, you can do the work to fix it. :)

Victor
-- 
Victor J. Orlikowski
======================
v.j.orlikowski@gte.net
orlikowski@apache.org
vjo@us.ibm.com

Re: mod_so enabling....

[rb...@covalent.net]

> dnl ### this isn't going to work quite right because of ordering issues
> dnl ### among the config.m4 files. it is possible that a *later* module
> dnl ### is marked as shared (thus setting sharedobjs), so we won't see
> dnl ### it here. we need to shift *this* config.m4 to be "last" or we
> dnl ### need to find a different way to set up this default and module spec.
>
> So, the implementer saw that a problem was coming here...
>
> What I'm asking for is a general suggestion from clearer heads than
> mine, as to what the Right Thing To Do (TM) is.
>
> Do we wish to set that config.m4 to be the last used, or is there a
> better suggestion?
> If nothing better arises, I'll put in the quick hack.

Just rename the file to config9.m4, and the problem should be solved.
That will ensure that it is one of, if not the last, config.m4 included.

Ryan

_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------