Mailing List Archive

Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x (fwd)
According to this guy, the standard Makefile doen't set the right
defaults for Linux, and neither does the Configuration file.

I think that's what he's getting at.

> From: andy@distrib.com (Andrew Cromarty)
> Subject: Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x

> We needn't beat a dead horse about the Makefile issue, but to answer your
> questions:
>
> - I followed the directions, and thus did not use Configure. The INSTALL
> file leads the user away from using Configure unless you want to
> add new modules:
>
> "If you are satisfied with our standard module set, and expect to
> continue to be satisfied with it, then you can just edit the stock
> Makefile and compile as you have been doing previously. If you would
> like to select optional modules, however, you need to run the
> configuration script."
>
> - Neither the Makefile nor the Config* files set the -ldbm load option with
> the other LINUXs options, nor document it as required specifically by LINUX.
> My suggestion was: adding this line to Configuration in the LINUX
> section probably is easier for you than answering 100's of questions
> about "why apache doesn't link under Linux." Your time, your choice....
> Note also that the Makefile provided with 0.8.13 apparently was not
> produced by the current version of Configure and Configuration.
>
> No need to reply to me on the above.
Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x (fwd) [ In reply to ]
If anyone can translate this to english please send me a copy.

Thank you.

<Aram>


At 03:18 PM 9/12/95 MDT, you wrote:
>
>According to this guy, the standard Makefile doen't set the right
>defaults for Linux, and neither does the Configuration file.
>
>I think that's what he's getting at.
>
>> From: andy@distrib.com (Andrew Cromarty)
>> Subject: Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x
>
>> We needn't beat a dead horse about the Makefile issue, but to answer your
>> questions:
>>
>> - I followed the directions, and thus did not use Configure. The INSTALL
>> file leads the user away from using Configure unless you want to
>> add new modules:
>>
>> "If you are satisfied with our standard module set, and expect to
>> continue to be satisfied with it, then you can just edit the stock
>> Makefile and compile as you have been doing previously. If you would
>> like to select optional modules, however, you need to run the
>> configuration script."
>>
>> - Neither the Makefile nor the Config* files set the -ldbm load option with
>> the other LINUXs options, nor document it as required specifically by
LINUX.
>> My suggestion was: adding this line to Configuration in the LINUX
>> section probably is easier for you than answering 100's of questions
>> about "why apache doesn't link under Linux." Your time, your choice....
>> Note also that the Makefile provided with 0.8.13 apparently was not
>> produced by the current version of Configure and Configuration.
>>
>> No need to reply to me on the above.
>
>
--
Aram W. Mirzadeh, MIS Manager, Qosina Corporation
http://www.qosina.com/~awm/, awm@qosina.com
Apache httpd server team http://www.apache.org
Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x (fwd) [ In reply to ]
Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x (fwd) [ In reply to ]
> From: andy@distrib.com (Andrew Cromarty)
> Subject: Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x

> We needn't beat a dead horse about the Makefile issue, but to answer your
> questions:
>
> - I followed the directions, and thus did not use Configure. The INSTALL
> file leads the user away from using Configure unless you want to
> add new modules:
>
> "If you are satisfied with our standard module set, and expect to
> continue to be satisfied with it, then you can just edit the stock
> Makefile and compile as you have been doing previously. If you would
> like to select optional modules, however, you need to run the
> configuration script."
>
> - Neither the Makefile nor the Config* files set the -ldbm load option with
> the other LINUXs options, nor document it as required specifically by LINUX.
> My suggestion was: adding this line to Configuration in the LINUX
> section probably is easier for you than answering 100's of questions
> about "why apache doesn't link under Linux." Your time, your choice....
> Note also that the Makefile provided with 0.8.13 apparently was not
> produced by the current version of Configure and Configuration.
>
> No need to reply to me on the above.

-ldbm (or -lgdbm) is only needed if you link in mod_auth_dbm, obviously.

OTOH, it'd be a good idea, I think, were the intructions to indicate
that editing Configuration and running Configure are the required
first steps. Get even the ones who don't want to think about the
modules used to that procedure, in case they get brave. :)

-JimC
--
James H. Cloos, Jr. include <std/qotd>
James.Cloos@JHCloos.COM include <std/disclaimers.h>
Work: cloos@io.com URL: http://www.jhcloos.com/~cloos/
LPF,Usenix,SAGE Snail: POBox 18122 Austin, TX 78760-8122
Re: bugs and design/build issues in Apache 0.8.1x (fwd) [ In reply to ]
At 11:18 PM 9/12/95 -0400, you wrote:
>Hmmm. A stock Linux compile 0f 0.8.13 (NOT using dbm libraries) builds fine
>here under Linux 1.2.9. I use Configure to generate the Makefile. I can only
>guess he was trying to build the dbm_auth_module or something. Or, I suspect,
>Linux is changing rapidly.
>
>I did get a bunch of warnings about LITTLE_ENDIAN being redefined and I get
>no warnings at home under the 'ancient' Linux 1.2.5. The includes in Linux
>seem to be getting more deeply nested, and duplicates are popping up.

These were fixed on 0.8.11 I belive werent' they? Could you email me
your Makefile please?

<Aram>

--
Aram W. Mirzadeh, MIS Manager, Qosina Corporation
http://www.qosina.com/~awm/, awm@qosina.com
Apache httpd server team http://www.apache.org