Mailing List Archive

>
> I'm ready to build 0.5
>
> Everything except the following is in..
>
>
> 58 - Makefile - Randy put up a last minute change which looks a lot
> better but I think is still needs changing.
> (things like the setting CC are outside of the section
> marked as configurable, and I can't see an easy way
> to add my -DHUGE_STRING_LENGTH=256)

I forgot about HUGE_STRING_LENGTH. It will take two minutes to add.
(probably be done by the time you read this mail)

As for CC, CC is set based on platform you are compiling for. (preset)
We could allow a spot to define this above, and you can override
the platform compile by typing 'make httpd'. Since I am compiling
regularly for several platforms, I would prefer to change the preset
CC in the platform line below. Is this really such a problem?


> 59 - server included html bug fixes. No veto, just not enough votes.
>
> 55 - virtual hosts. No veto, just not enough votes.

This appears to work. I think it is important to get in and
would like us to bend the rules to do that since we have no
vetos.

What say you?

> >
> > I'm ready to build 0.5
> >
> > Everything except the following is in..
> >
> >
> > 58 - Makefile - Randy put up a last minute change which looks a lot
> > better but I think is still needs changing.
> > (things like the setting CC are outside of the section
> > marked as configurable, and I can't see an easy way
> > to add my -DHUGE_STRING_LENGTH=256)
>
> I forgot about HUGE_STRING_LENGTH. It will take two minutes to add.
> (probably be done by the time you read this mail)
>
> As for CC, CC is set based on platform you are compiling for. (preset)
> We could allow a spot to define this above, and you can override
> the platform compile by typing 'make httpd'. Since I am compiling
> regularly for several platforms, I would prefer to change the preset
> CC in the platform line below. Is this really such a problem?

I tacked a patch to the bottom of this file for httpd.h which is
necessary if you want your HUGE_STRING_LEN define to work without
error.

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
> 59 and 55 could be included if someone who "forgot" to vote or whose
> votes I might have missed, mails me in the next half hour.
> (Randy and Rob T votes for 55, Randy and me for 59)

Next half hour? Man, do some people think we get our IP feeds via
intravenous injection or something?

55 - +1, if Cliff and Randy have tested it and it works, gets my +1. Cliff
and I have used an early version of it on Organic for a couple months now
(patched against just 1.3 of course :)

59 - -1, I don't think the server should muck (er, translate) <, >, or &
in #echo at all, the onus is on the content provider to get that right
(and besides, what if I want to use HTML tags or SGML entities?)

58 - Looking at the patch up there *right*now*, it looks like it's still
setting MAX_STRING_LEN to HUGE_STRING_LEN, except now you can set HUGE to
be whatever you want. This begs the question as to why there were ever
two separate values, and what would happen if I made HUGE 256 (since
that's all I want MAX to be). I could be wrong because I'm only looking
at the patch and haven't had time to apply it.

Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@hotwired.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.hotwired.com/Staff/brian/

> I tacked a patch to the bottom of this file for httpd.h which is
> necessary if you want your HUGE_STRING_LEN define to work without
> error.

I think it's too late to try to get a Makefile patch accepted now,
unless someone else comes forward now to say it's really needed
for 0.5. It'll be easy to add it once we're all happy with it.


-=-=-=

I've just patched the 13 accepted patches against a fresh copy of
0.4. A 0.5 will be available soon.

rob