Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Jacob Champion]

On 03/24/2016 06:05 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> I observed the note below in 2010 when that comment was first made (I
> cribbed that comment from 2.2.x checkin).  So I now wonder if that note
> was based on an Express edition perhaps?  Or on an early release - and
> MS later added or fixed the conversion?  I can't be more specific at
> this point, but maybe someone else remembers such an issue.

I do remember from a couple of years ago that the results of the
conversion were mostly useless/broken for me, but I no longer have a
copy of VS2010 to check... so I can't offer anything more than "there
was probably a good reason to make that comment at some point". :/

--Jacob

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[William A Rowe Jr]

Steffan,

I was plesantly surprised when I tested this on an early VS2015 preview and
the conversion was still supported.

I observed the note below in 2010 when that comment was first made (I
cribbed that comment from 2.2.x checkin).  So I now wonder if that note was
based on an Express edition perhaps?  Or on an early release - and MS later
added or fixed the conversion?  I can't be more specific at this point, but
maybe someone else remembers such an issue.
On Mar 24, 2016 05:39, "Steffen" <i...@apachelounge.com> wrote:

> Good now.
>
> Little note:  Visual Studio 2010 users cannot convert our .dsp files.
> That's not true, I convert them.
>
> Steffen
>
>
>
> From: William A Rowe Jr Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 9:23 PM
> To: httpd Subject: ***** Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build
> files.
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Steffen <i...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>
> I went earlier back, so I did a .dsp/GUI build with no issues.
> Build with SVN revision 1736328.
>
> Running looks also fine sofar.
>
>
>
>
>
> Glad to hear, thanks for testing.  I've updated the commit log message
> to more clearly explain the intent and avoid future confusion;
>
> +Going forwards, keep win32 build in svn once a tree is stable.
> +Visual Studio 2010 users cannot convert our .dsp files, and
> +ddk toolchain users couldn't either.
> +
> +Applies the same logic as r1100294 on the 2.2.x branch.
> +
> Until the cmake build schema is entirely mature, these files
> are needed for command-line builds of the 2.4 tree, and are
> expected to change very little until the EOL of 2.4 branch.
> -The actual .dsp files are entirely unusable for any shipping
> -version of MSVC/Visual Studio, while the .mak exports of these
> -projects are usable on any flavor of the MS build environment.
> +
> +The .dsp source files are not directly usable for any shipping
> +version of MSVC/Visual Studio (post-Visual Studio 97 release),
> +while the .mak exports of these projects are usable on any flavor
> +of the MS nmake build environment.  The .dsp source files are
> +retained for those users wishing to import these projects into
> +the modern vcproj/sln file format.
>
>
> Hope that is more clear, further edit suggestions are welcome.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Bill
>

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Steffen]

Good now.

Little note:  Visual Studio 2010 users cannot convert our .dsp files.
That's not true, I convert them.

Steffen



From: William A Rowe Jr 
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 9:23 PM
To: httpd 
Subject: * Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.


On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Steffen <i...@apachelounge.com> wrote:

I went earlier back, so I did a .dsp/GUI build with no issues. 


Build with SVN revision 1736328.

Running looks also fine sofar.





Glad to hear, thanks for testing.  I've updated the commit log message
to more clearly explain the intent and avoid future confusion;

+Going forwards, keep win32 build in svn once a tree is stable.
+Visual Studio 2010 users cannot convert our .dsp files, and
+ddk toolchain users couldn't either.
+
+Applies the same logic as r1100294 on the 2.2.x branch.
+
Until the cmake build schema is entirely mature, these files
are needed for command-line builds of the 2.4 tree, and are
expected to change very little until the EOL of 2.4 branch.
-The actual .dsp files are entirely unusable for any shipping
-version of MSVC/Visual Studio, while the .mak exports of these
-projects are usable on any flavor of the MS build environment.
+
+The .dsp source files are not directly usable for any shipping
+version of MSVC/Visual Studio (post-Visual Studio 97 release),
+while the .mak exports of these projects are usable on any flavor
+of the MS nmake build environment.  The .dsp source files are
+retained for those users wishing to import these projects into
+the modern vcproj/sln file format.


Hope that is more clear, further edit suggestions are welcome.


Cheers,


Bill

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[William A Rowe Jr]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Steffen  wrote:

> I went earlier back, so I did a .dsp/GUI build with no issues.
>
> Build with SVN revision 1736328.
>
> Running looks also fine sofar.
>

Glad to hear, thanks for testing.  I've updated the commit log message
to more clearly explain the intent and avoid future confusion;

+Going forwards, keep win32 build in svn once a tree is stable.
+Visual Studio 2010 users cannot convert our .dsp files, and
+ddk toolchain users couldn't either.
+
+Applies the same logic as r1100294 on the 2.2.x branch.
+
 Until the cmake build schema is entirely mature, these files
 are needed for command-line builds of the 2.4 tree, and are
 expected to change very little until the EOL of 2.4 branch.
-The actual .dsp files are entirely unusable for any shipping
-version of MSVC/Visual Studio, while the .mak exports of these
-projects are usable on any flavor of the MS build environment.
+
+The .dsp source files are not directly usable for any shipping
+version of MSVC/Visual Studio (post-Visual Studio 97 release),
+while the .mak exports of these projects are usable on any flavor
+of the MS nmake build environment.  The .dsp source files are
+retained for those users wishing to import these projects into
+the modern vcproj/sln file format.

Hope that is more clear, further edit suggestions are welcome.

Cheers,

Bill

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Steffen]

Running now AL: mod_http2 (v1.4.4, nghttp2 1.8.0), initializing...

Was running 1.2.8 (git). 

Little confusing the version number httpd vs git (1.4.4 vs 1.2.8)

Still worried about the memory footprint:

Mod_http2 1.0.11 (2.4.18) average ~100 MB peaks with 200 MB. 

with 1.2.8 average ~200 MB with peaks ~600 MB. 

I shall keep an eye on 1.4.4. 


> Op 23 mrt. 2016 om 17:26 heeft Stefan Eissing  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Thanks, Steffen!
> 
>> Am 23.03.2016 um 17:12 schrieb Steffen :
>> 
>> I went earlier back, so I did a .dsp/GUI build with no issues. 
>> 
>> Build with SVN revision 1736328.
>> 
>> Running looks also fine sofar.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:50, Jim Jagielski wrote: 
>>> Thx... I would like to T today if possible, because I was hoping
>>> for a release by the end of this week, but I also don't want to
>>> have to punt 2.4.20 as well, so we should wait.
>>> 
 On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:39 AM, Steffen  wrote:
 
 Sure I like to do, but sorry I am out of town, to morrow morning (my time) 
 I can build.
 
 Maybe Jan E and/or Gregg can give it a .dsp try.
 
 When I look to the changes, it should build.
 
 
 
> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:36, Jim Jagielski wrote: 
> Can you do a quick check that HEAD of 2.4 builds for you?
> 
> THX!!
> 
>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Steffen  wrote:
>> 
>> Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe 
>> does not break a .dsp build.
>> 
>> My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not 
>> usable, which is not true.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote: 
 On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  
 wrote:
 Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
> Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
> 
> The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.
> 
> I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the 
> issue ?
 
 I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
 VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
 http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd 
 on
 Windows.
>>> 
>>> Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?
>>> 
>>> AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
>>> change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
>>> he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
>>> Why would that break dsp files?
> 

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Stefan Eissing]

Thanks, Steffen!

> Am 23.03.2016 um 17:12 schrieb Steffen :
> 
> I went earlier back, so I did a .dsp/GUI build with no issues. 
> 
> Build with SVN revision 1736328.
> 
> Running looks also fine sofar.
> 
>  
>  
> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:50, Jim Jagielski wrote: 
>> Thx... I would like to T today if possible, because I was hoping
>> for a release by the end of this week, but I also don't want to
>> have to punt 2.4.20 as well, so we should wait.
>> 
>>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:39 AM, Steffen  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sure I like to do, but sorry I am out of town, to morrow morning (my time) 
>>> I can build.
>>> 
>>> Maybe Jan E and/or Gregg can give it a .dsp try.
>>> 
>>> When I look to the changes, it should build.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:36, Jim Jagielski wrote: 
 Can you do a quick check that HEAD of 2.4 builds for you?
 
 THX!!
 
> On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Steffen  wrote:
> 
> Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe 
> does not break a .dsp build.
> 
> My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not 
> usable, which is not true.
> 
> 
>
> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote: 
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  
>> wrote:
>>> Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
 Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
 
 The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.
 
 I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the 
 issue ?
>>> 
>>> I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
>>> VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
>>> http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
>>> Windows.
>> 
>> Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?
>> 
>> AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
>> change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
>> he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
>> Why would that break dsp files?
> 
> 
 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Steffen]

I went earlier back, so I did a .dsp/GUI build with no issues.

Build with SVN revision 1736328.

Running looks also fine sofar.




On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:50, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

Thx... I would like to T today if possible, because I was hoping
for a release by the end of this week, but I also don't want to
have to punt 2.4.20 as well, so we should wait.



On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:39 AM, Steffen  wrote:

Sure I like to do, but sorry I am out of town, to morrow morning (my 
time) I can build.


Maybe Jan E and/or Gregg can give it a .dsp try.

When I look to the changes, it should build.



On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:36, Jim Jagielski wrote:


Can you do a quick check that HEAD of 2.4 builds for you?

THX!!



On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Steffen  wrote:

Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe 
does not break a .dsp build.


My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not 
usable, which is not true.




On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote:


On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  
wrote:


Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):


Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.

The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.

I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the 
issue ?


I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 
/

VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd 
on

Windows.


Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?

AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
Why would that break dsp files?

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[William A Rowe Jr]

On Mar 23, 2016 3:15 AM, "Steffen"  wrote:
>
> Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
>
> The comment says the the .dsp flies are entirely ! unusable.
>
> I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14.   What was the
issue ?

They were directly usable on VC98.  They were also directly exportable to
.mak files on that version of the MS build tooling, alone.

In post-VC98 (which cannot be obtained from Microsoft any longer due to the
Sun settlement) they are not "usable" - but they are convertible, although
they are not exportable.  There is lots of documentation on how to
translate these into the modern solution file formats in order to be able
to build httpd on Windows.

But they don't "simply work", e.g. " usable", without this manual
conversion process, do we agree?

The commit did not remove the .dsp files, those who wish to convert the
files into the new GUI schema remain able to do so.

> So please explain why for you it is not usable ?

Some more context can be found here;

http://markmail.org/thread/k2d6nwkz5w3p35yl

If the commit looks familiar, it aught to...

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision=1100294

http://markmail.org/message/4gyjktdp7ls3cxij

> Change comment:
>
> The actual .dsp files are entirely unusable for any shipping
> version of MSVC/Visual Studio, while the .mak exports of these
> projects are usable on any flavor of the MS build environment.

I'm happy to edit the commit log message to better reflect the comments
above.

I hope that clarifies this commit and resolves any confusion I might have
created?

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Jim Jagielski]

Thx... I would like to T today if possible, because I was hoping
for a release by the end of this week, but I also don't want to
have to punt 2.4.20 as well, so we should wait.

> On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:39 AM, Steffen  wrote:
> 
> Sure I like to do, but sorry I am out of town, to morrow morning (my time) I 
> can build.
> 
> Maybe Jan E and/or Gregg can give it a .dsp try.
> 
> When I look to the changes, it should build.
> 
> 
>  
> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:36, Jim Jagielski wrote: 
>> Can you do a quick check that HEAD of 2.4 builds for you?
>> 
>> THX!!
>> 
>>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Steffen  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe does 
>>> not break a .dsp build.
>>> 
>>> My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not 
>>> usable, which is not true.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote: 
 On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  wrote:
> Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
>> Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
>> 
>> The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.
>> 
>> I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the 
>> issue ?
> 
> I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
> VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
> http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
> Windows.
 
 Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?
 
 AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
 change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
 he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
 Why would that break dsp files?
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Steffen]

Sure I like to do, but sorry I am out of town, to morrow morning (my 
time) I can build.


Maybe Jan E and/or Gregg can give it a .dsp try.

When I look to the changes, it should build.




On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:36, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

Can you do a quick check that HEAD of 2.4 builds for you?

THX!!



On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Steffen  wrote:

Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe 
does not break a .dsp build.


My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not 
usable, which is not true.




On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote:


On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  
wrote:


Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):


Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.

The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.

I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the 
issue ?


I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 
/

VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd 
on

Windows.


Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?

AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
Why would that break dsp files?

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Jim Jagielski]

Can you do a quick check that HEAD of 2.4 builds for you?

THX!!

> On Mar 23, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Steffen  wrote:
> 
> Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe does 
> not break a .dsp build.
> 
> My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not usable, 
> which is not true.
> 
> 
>  
> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote: 
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  wrote:
>>> Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
 Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
 
 The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.
 
 I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the issue ?
>>> 
>>> I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
>>> VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
>>> http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
>>> Windows.
>> 
>> Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?
>> 
>> AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
>> change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
>> he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
>> Why would that break dsp files?
> 
> 

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Yann Ylavic]

OK, thanks for clarifying Steffen.

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Steffen  wrote:
> Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe does
> not break a .dsp build.
>
> My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not usable,
> which is not true.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  wrote:
>
> Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
>
> Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
>
> The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.
>
> I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14. What was the issue ?
>
>
> I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
> VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
> http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
> Windows.
>
>
> Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?
>
> AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
> change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
> he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
> Why would that break dsp files?
>
>

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Steffen]

Indeed wrowe did not change any .dsp files. and the changes from wrowe 
does not break a .dsp build.


My attention was just the statement of wrowe that .dsp files are not 
usable, which is not true.





On Wednesday 23/03/2016 at 12:20, Yann Ylavic  wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  
wrote:


Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):


Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.

The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.

I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14.   What was the 
issue ?


I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 
/

VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd 
on

Windows.


Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?

AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
Why would that break dsp files?

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Yann Ylavic]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  wrote:
> Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
>>Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche.
>>
>>The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable.
>>
>>I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14.   What was the issue ?
>
> I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
> VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
> http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
> Windows.

Does building 2.4.x from the .dsp files still work or not?

AIUI (but my understanding of Windows is quite limited), Bill did not
change any dsp file (but removing mod_lbmethod_rr which did not work),
he "just" added some .mak and .dep files.
Why would that break dsp files?

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Jim Jagielski]

Agreed! wtf?!

> On Mar 23, 2016, at 6:18 AM, Jan Ehrhardt  wrote:
> 
> Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
>> Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche. 
>> 
>> The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable. 
>> 
>> I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14.   What was the issue ?
> 
> I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
> VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
> http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
> Windows.
> 
> Jan
> 

Re: 2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Jan Ehrhardt]

Steffen in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:15:45 +0100):
>Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche. 
>
>The comment says the the .dsp files are entirely ! unusable. 
>
>I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14.   What was the issue ?

I agree with Steffen. This week I have built httpd 2.4.19 (VC9 / VC11 /
VC14 & x86 / x64) using the .dsp files. I even commented that the
http2.dsp was missing a line. They are the easiest way to build httpd on
Windows.

Jan

2.4.20 Change dsp: Win32-specific build files.

[Steffen]

Saw that wrowe did a change win make files in 2.4. branche. 

The comment says the the .dsp flies are entirely ! unusable. 

I can tell that they are entirely usable with V9-VC14.   What was the issue ?

So please explain why for you it is not usable ?
Change comment:
The actual .dsp files are entirely unusable for any shipping version of 
MSVC/Visual Studio, while the .mak exports of these projects are usable on any 
flavor of the MS build environment.