The patch appears to be as simple as;
Index: modules/proxy/config.m4
===================================================================
--- modules/proxy/config.m4 (revision 1749791)
+++ modules/proxy/config.m4 (working copy)
@@ -59,14 +59,13 @@
APACHE_MODULE(proxy_balancer, Apache proxy BALANCER module. Requires and
is enabled by --enable-proxy., $proxy_balancer_objs, , $proxy_mods_enable,,
proxy)
APACHE_MODULE(proxy_express, mass reverse-proxy module. Requires
--enable-proxy., , , $proxy_mods_enable,, proxy)
-APACHE_MODULE(proxy_hcheck, [reverse-proxy health-check module. Requires
--enable-proxy and --enable-watchdog.], , ,[
- $proxy_mods_enable
- dnl Verify that both proxy_mods_enable above and watchdog below are
enabled
+APACHE_MODULE(proxy_hcheck, [reverse-proxy health-check module. Requires
--enable-proxy and --enable-watchdog.], , , $proxy_mods_enable, [
+ dnl Verify that both proxy_mods_enable above and watchdog below are
honored
dnl when --enable-proxy-hcheck isn't explicitly elected
if test "$enable_watchdog" = "no"; then
enable_proxy_hcheck="no";
fi
-], , [proxy,watchdog])
+], [proxy,watchdog])
APR_ADDTO(INCLUDES, [-I\$(top_srcdir)/$modpath_current])
... or perhaps enable_proxy_hcheck="" - and let prerequisites
kill the enablement. Still reviewing.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 7:21 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> Ugg... Thanks for the test and the feedback. Will hold off
> and look into it.
>
> > On Jun 23, 2016, at 7:13 AM, Jens Schleusener <
> jens.schleuse...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >
> >> Subj sez it all... afaict, there are no showstoppers and
> >> no outstanding issues (none seen in STATUS, or noted as
> >> such on any Email threads).
> >>
> >> Sooooo... anyone opposed to a T&R tomorrow in the hopes
> >> of getting this out to people by the start of next week??
> >
> > Just for curiosity I copied the soure code via
> >
> > svn checkout http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x
> >
> > and did for building the "configure" script a
> >
> > src/httpd-2.4.x> ./buildconf
> >
> > found apr source: srclib/apr
> > rebuilding srclib/apr/configure
> > buildconf: checking installation...
> > buildconf: python version 2.7.9 (ok)
> > buildconf: autoconf version 2.69 (ok)
> > buildconf: libtool version 2.4.2 (ok)
> > buildconf: copying libtool helper files using /usr/bin/libtoolize
> > buildconf: creating include/arch/unix/apr_private.h.in ...
> > buildconf: creating configure ...
> > buildconf: generating 'make' outputs ...
> > buildconf: rebuilding rpm spec file
> > copying build files
> > rebuilding include/ap_config_auto.h.in
> > rebuilding configure
> > rebuilding rpm spec file
> > fixing timestamps for ap_expr sources
> >
> > and then issued
> >
> > src/httpd-2.4.x> ./configure --enable-mods-shared=few
> >
> > configure: loading site script /usr/share/site/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
> > checking for chosen layout... Apache
> > [... many lines deleted ...]
> > checking whether to enable mod_proxy_express... no (few)
> > checking whether to enable mod_proxy_hcheck... checking dependencies
> > configure: WARNING: "mod_proxy is disabled but required for
> mod_proxy_hcheck"
> > checking whether to enable mod_proxy_hcheck... configure: error:
> > mod_proxy_hcheck has been requested but can not be built due to
> prerequisite failures
> >
> > So it appears not the identical but a similar failure compared to that
> one I reported some days ago ("Small problem in "configure" script with
> 2.4.21"): Now "mod_watchdog" is replaced by "mod_proxy".
> >
> > And again: Since the option "--enable-mods-shared=few" doesn't include
> any "proxy"-related modules I also don't expect to build the "reverse-proxy
> health-check module".
> >
> > I am not sure if there is still a problem or if my "configure" building
> and testing is incorrect.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Jens
> >
>
>
