You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org> on 2003/01/22 18:52:56 UTC
Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Anyone have any serious objections to releasing HEAD of apr/apr-util
as 0.9.2? Does anyone want to volunteer to be RM? (Should be
painless, but I really have other stuff to do...)
I think we have the release showstoppers in apr-util resolved now (in
that it can build by itself). APR has mostly pie-in-the-sky
showstoppers... -- justin
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> this means we still need the apr source tree around to build apr-util,
>> right?
>
>
> No, it should copy all of the required files from apr so that apr-util
> can build independently. -- justin
<monty burns> excellent </monty burns>
-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Wednesday, January 29, 2003 13:54:49 -0500 Garrett Rooney
<ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
> so the buildconf's --with-apr sets the default and you can override it at
> configure time?
>
> this means we still need the apr source tree around to build apr-util,
> right?
No, it should copy all of the required files from apr so that apr-util can
build independently. -- justin
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>Didn't you see the patches to buildconf that I submitted to this mailing list to
>solve this problem (which have now been committed)?
>
oh, i've seen it, i just haven't had the chance to actually try it out.
> Now you do:
>
>buildconf --with-apr=[dir]; ./configure --with-apr=[dir]
>
so the buildconf's --with-apr sets the default and you can override it
at configure time?
this means we still need the apr source tree around to build apr-util,
right?
-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Craig Rodrigues <ro...@attbi.com>.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:28:05PM -0500, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> do we need the --with-apr=../apr anymore? is it possible to point to an
> installed version of apr? more importantly, does this work if apr and
> apr-util are in directories named something other than 'apr' and
> 'apr-util'. last time it broke when we had apr-0.9.1 and apr-util-0.9.1.
Didn't you see the patches to buildconf that I submitted to this mailing list to
solve this problem (which have now been committed)? Now you do:
buildconf --with-apr=[dir]; ./configure --with-apr=[dir]
--
Craig Rodrigues
http://home.attbi.com/~rodrigc
rodrigc@attbi.com
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>> Okay, here is what would be helpful and something you might be able to
>> provide feedback on: can you *build* and *install* parallel
>> apr/apr-util? Bonus question: Can you use httpd with an installed
>> apr/apr-util? If not, what do we need to fix?
>
>
> cd apr
> ./buildconf && ./configure --prefix=$HOME/aprinst
> make && make install
> cd ../apr-util
> ./buildconf && ./configure --prefix=$HOME/aprinst --with-apr=../apr
> make && make install
do we need the --with-apr=../apr anymore? is it possible to point to an
installed version of apr? more importantly, does this work if apr and
apr-util are in directories named something other than 'apr' and
'apr-util'. last time it broke when we had apr-0.9.1 and apr-util-0.9.1.
-garrett
Re: [PATCH] build apr-util with installed apr (was Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?)
Posted by Thom May <th...@planetarytramp.net>.
* Garrett Rooney (rooneg@electricjellyfish.net) wrote :
> Uh, just resending this in case it dropped through the cracks. It'd be
> nice if we could build apr-util with the installed version of apr,
> rather than dipping our fingers into it's source tree for rules.mk.
>
Committed, thanks!
-Thom
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Thursday, January 30, 2003, at 10:24 PM, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Garrett Rooney wrote:
>
>> copying rules.mk along with the other files from apr seems like as
>> good
>> a plan as any, and it seems to work.
>
> Do me a favor and post patches as type text/plain...
> application/octet-stream doesn't get along with my mail client. :)
my apologies...
let's just hope Mail.app doesn't decide to wrap lines on this one.
(well, even if it does, the patch is trivial, i'm sure you'll be able
to apply it.)
-garrett
Index: buildconf
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr-util/buildconf,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -d -b -w -r1.7 buildconf
--- buildconf 22 Jan 2003 17:45:20 -0000 1.7
+++ buildconf 31 Jan 2003 03:20:05 -0000
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
build/config.guess build/config.sub
cp $apr_src_dir/build/apr_common.m4 $apr_src_dir/build/find_apr.m4 \
$apr_src_dir/build/install.sh $apr_src_dir/build/config.guess \
- $apr_src_dir/build/config.sub build
+ $apr_src_dir/build/config.sub $apr_src_dir/build/rules.mk build
# Remove aclocal.m4 as it'll break some builds...
rm -rf aclocal.m4 autom4te*.cache
Index: configure.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr-util/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.60
diff -u -d -b -w -r1.60 configure.in
--- configure.in 22 Jan 2003 17:45:20 -0000 1.60
+++ configure.in 31 Jan 2003 03:20:05 -0000
@@ -134,13 +134,13 @@
*bsdi* | BSD/OS)
# Check whether they've installed GNU make
if make --version > /dev/null 2>&1; then
- INCLUDE_RULES="include $APR_BUILD_DIR/build/rules.mk"
+ INCLUDE_RULES="include $abs_srcdir/build/rules.mk"
else
- INCLUDE_RULES=".include \"$APR_BUILD_DIR/build/rules.mk\""
+ INCLUDE_RULES=".include \"$abs_srcdir/build/rules.mk\""
fi
;;
*)
- INCLUDE_RULES="include $APR_BUILD_DIR/build/rules.mk"
+ INCLUDE_RULES="include $abs_srcdir/build/rules.mk"
;;
esac
AC_SUBST(INCLUDE_RULES)
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Cliff Woolley <jw...@virginia.edu>.
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> copying rules.mk along with the other files from apr seems like as good
> a plan as any, and it seems to work.
Do me a favor and post patches as type text/plain...
application/octet-stream doesn't get along with my mail client. :)
Thanks,
Cliff
[PATCH] build apr-util with installed apr (was Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?)
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
Uh, just resending this in case it dropped through the cracks. It'd be
nice if we could build apr-util with the installed version of apr,
rather than dipping our fingers into it's source tree for rules.mk.
-garrett
* buildconf: copy rules.mk from apr source tree.
* configure.in: use rules.mk in our tree instead of the one in apr's.
Index: buildconf
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr-util/buildconf,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -d -b -w -r1.7 buildconf
--- buildconf 22 Jan 2003 17:45:20 -0000 1.7
+++ buildconf 31 Jan 2003 03:20:05 -0000
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
build/config.guess build/config.sub
cp $apr_src_dir/build/apr_common.m4 $apr_src_dir/build/find_apr.m4 \
$apr_src_dir/build/install.sh $apr_src_dir/build/config.guess \
- $apr_src_dir/build/config.sub build
+ $apr_src_dir/build/config.sub $apr_src_dir/build/rules.mk build
# Remove aclocal.m4 as it'll break some builds...
rm -rf aclocal.m4 autom4te*.cache
Index: configure.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr-util/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.60
diff -u -d -b -w -r1.60 configure.in
--- configure.in 22 Jan 2003 17:45:20 -0000 1.60
+++ configure.in 31 Jan 2003 03:20:05 -0000
@@ -134,13 +134,13 @@
*bsdi* | BSD/OS)
# Check whether they've installed GNU make
if make --version > /dev/null 2>&1; then
- INCLUDE_RULES="include $APR_BUILD_DIR/build/rules.mk"
+ INCLUDE_RULES="include $abs_srcdir/build/rules.mk"
else
- INCLUDE_RULES=".include \"$APR_BUILD_DIR/build/rules.mk\""
+ INCLUDE_RULES=".include \"$abs_srcdir/build/rules.mk\""
fi
;;
*)
- INCLUDE_RULES="include $APR_BUILD_DIR/build/rules.mk"
+ INCLUDE_RULES="include $abs_srcdir/build/rules.mk"
;;
esac
AC_SUBST(INCLUDE_RULES)
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 02:13 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Wednesday, January 29, 2003 13:24:37 -0500 Jeff Trawick
> <tr...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> (apr-util can't be told to use the APR installed dir since apr-util
>> relies on rules.mk and perhaps other stuff from apr build tree)
>
> Okay, so we should fix this. Either copy the rules.mk.in into
> apr-util at buildconf-time or something (installing rules.mk seems a
> bit iffy). Not sure here. Thoughts?
copying rules.mk along with the other files from apr seems like as good
a plan as any, and it seems to work.
here's a patch.
-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Wednesday, January 29, 2003 13:24:37 -0500 Jeff Trawick
<tr...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> (apr-util can't be told to use the APR installed dir since apr-util
> relies on rules.mk and perhaps other stuff from apr build tree)
Okay, so we should fix this. Either copy the rules.mk.in into apr-util at
buildconf-time or something (installing rules.mk seems a bit iffy). Not
sure here. Thoughts?
> cd ../httpd-2.0
> ./buildconf
> (fails because it relies on srclib/apr)
Well, ./buildconf will always require srclib/apr (we could do a similar
thing like we did for apr-util by adding a --with-apr flag to httpd's
buildconf). The idea is not to require a particular directory layout once
configure is built. -- justin
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Okay, here is what would be helpful and something you might be able to
> provide feedback on: can you *build* and *install* parallel
> apr/apr-util? Bonus question: Can you use httpd with an installed
> apr/apr-util? If not, what do we need to fix?
cd apr
./buildconf && ./configure --prefix=$HOME/aprinst
make && make install
cd ../apr-util
./buildconf && ./configure --prefix=$HOME/aprinst --with-apr=../apr
make && make install
(apr-util can't be told to use the APR installed dir since apr-util
relies on rules.mk and perhaps other stuff from apr build tree)
everything okay so far
cd ../httpd-2.0
./buildconf
(fails because it relies on srclib/apr)
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 01:04 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> --On Tuesday, January 28, 2003 8:07 AM -0500 Garrett Rooney
> <ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
>
>> if nobody else is volunteering (and i don't think i've seen another
>> response on the list) i'd be happy to do any associated legwork
>> that's needed, but as i don't have commit access, someone else is
>> going to need to be involved at some point.
>
> Okay, here is what would be helpful and something you might be able to
> provide feedback on: can you *build* and *install* parallel
> apr/apr-util? Bonus question: Can you use httpd with an installed
> apr/apr-util? If not, what do we need to fix?
>
> I think knowing tenatively that these packaging issues are
> straightened out before we tag would be *real* nice. -- justin
i'll give that a try tonight.
-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
--On Tuesday, January 28, 2003 8:07 AM -0500 Garrett Rooney
<ro...@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
> if nobody else is volunteering (and i don't think i've seen another
> response on the list) i'd be happy to do any associated legwork
> that's needed, but as i don't have commit access, someone else is
> going to need to be involved at some point.
Okay, here is what would be helpful and something you might be able
to provide feedback on: can you *build* and *install* parallel
apr/apr-util? Bonus question: Can you use httpd with an installed
apr/apr-util? If not, what do we need to fix?
I think knowing tenatively that these packaging issues are
straightened out before we tag would be *real* nice. -- justin
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 03:21 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> in that case, why don't we wait for this change, then roll 0.9.2? now
>> that the issues with the configure scripts that kept us from building
>> from a released tarball have been resolved, i'd like to see apr making
>> releases more often, so client apps (apache, subversion, etc) can
>> simply
>> use those rather than pulling something out of cvs.
>
> I totally agree. I'd love to release them myself, but haven't been
> finding
> the time :-(
ok, so what's the deal here? so far, everyone seems to be in favor of
making this release, but nobody's jumped up and said "i'll do it, i'll
do it". it looks like most (all?) the changes people wanted to get in
have been made, so are we ready to roll a tarball? what needs to be
done to make this happen?
if nobody else is volunteering (and i don't think i've seen another
response on the list) i'd be happy to do any associated legwork that's
needed, but as i don't have commit access, someone else is going to
need to be involved at some point.
so are we ready to roll a release? or are we going to all say 'yeah,
we should roll a release' and then sit back and wait a few months until
someone brings it up again?
-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 03:05:26PM -0500, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> >So my personal desire would be to release 2.0.45, with its bugfixes
> >based on APR 0.9.2 (release). Would anyone object to that symytry?
If "based on APR 0.9.2", you mean: APR(UTIL) releases "soon", and httpd next
week, referring to 0.9.2 as a minimum version, then yes.
If "based on" means snapping APR into httpd, then no.
[ I suspect the former, so all is good with me ]
>...
> >The only other 'little thing' I want to do is bring in Allen Edward's
> >suggestions for debugging symbols for win32 release builds, so
> >those of us bug hunting can track down pesky segfaults and other
> >odd behavior from Win32 core dumps. It's a trivial patch, I'm just
> >trying to figure out how we can also get WinNT .dbg symbol files
> >out of the deal without too much pain.
Let's not hold the release on this. If that misses 0.9.2, then we can always
snap another release.
> in that case, why don't we wait for this change, then roll 0.9.2? now
> that the issues with the configure scripts that kept us from building
> from a released tarball have been resolved, i'd like to see apr making
> releases more often, so client apps (apache, subversion, etc) can simply
> use those rather than pulling something out of cvs.
I totally agree. I'd love to release them myself, but haven't been finding
the time :-(
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>So my personal desire would be to release 2.0.45, with its bugfixes
>based on APR 0.9.2 (release). Would anyone object to that symytry?
>
>
this seems reasonable to me. i like the idea of apache picking up an
actual release of apr, as opposed to effectively rolling it's own by
shipping a snapshot of what's in CVS.
>The only other 'little thing' I want to do is bring in Allen Edward's
>suggestions for debugging symbols for win32 release builds, so
>those of us bug hunting can track down pesky segfaults and other
>odd behavior from Win32 core dumps. It's a trivial patch, I'm just
>trying to figure out how we can also get WinNT .dbg symbol files
>out of the deal without too much pain.
>
in that case, why don't we wait for this change, then roll 0.9.2? now
that the issues with the configure scripts that kept us from building
from a released tarball have been resolved, i'd like to see apr making
releases more often, so client apps (apache, subversion, etc) can simply
use those rather than pulling something out of cvs.
-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
FWIW... head is broken for apr/time/win32/time.c ... and the patch is
forthcoming.
My thinking is that a couple thousand users are just getting their first
look at our latest APR, via HTTPD 2.0.44, and they are finding a couple
of bugs. We also might want to get more platforms recorded from the
test suite... I'll start a STATUS entry for testall exceptions.
I'm going to RM an HTTPD 2.0.45 maintenance release next week,
based on fixing those bugs (and a few other old ones that anyone
cares to pick up and fix.)
So my personal desire would be to release 2.0.45, with its bugfixes
based on APR 0.9.2 (release). Would anyone object to that symytry?
The only other 'little thing' I want to do is bring in Allen Edward's
suggestions for debugging symbols for win32 release builds, so
those of us bug hunting can track down pesky segfaults and other
odd behavior from Win32 core dumps. It's a trivial patch, I'm just
trying to figure out how we can also get WinNT .dbg symbol files
out of the deal without too much pain.
Bill
At 12:05 PM 1/22/2003, Garrett Rooney wrote:
>Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>>Anyone have any serious objections to releasing HEAD of apr/apr-util as 0.9.2? Does anyone want to volunteer to be RM? (Should be painless, but I really have other stuff to do...)
>>
>>I think we have the release showstoppers in apr-util resolved now (in that it can build by itself). APR has mostly pie-in-the-sky showstoppers... -- justin
>
>
>+1, cut the next release soon.
>
>-garrett
Re: Release 0.9.2 of apr/apr-util?
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Anyone have any serious objections to releasing HEAD of apr/apr-util
> as 0.9.2? Does anyone want to volunteer to be RM? (Should be
> painless, but I really have other stuff to do...)
>
> I think we have the release showstoppers in apr-util resolved now (in
> that it can build by itself). APR has mostly pie-in-the-sky
> showstoppers... -- justin
+1, cut the next release soon.
-garrett