> What makes you think the awk solution is any more portable than the Perl
> solution?
awk is a standard Unix tool and has a specification in my copy of the
CAE X/OPEN docco. Perl is not. Add to that the fact that awk is a much
simpler program, can be had under a BSD license, and much is ea
> From: Cliff Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2000 7:48 PM
>
> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The Apache Group has looked at Cygwin before. We do not
> plan to include
> > support for Cygwin right now. That may change in the future, but we
> > dislike the lice
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> trawick 00/12/17 05:12:12
>
> Modified:.CHANGES aclocal.m4
> Log:
> Tighten up the check for getaddrinfo(). If it can't figure out
> the appropriate address family for 127.0.0.1, it fails.
> Unfortunately, Tru64 fails this test so we won't do
This message is meant to serve as a reminder to everybody and as a STATUS
message. I will be updating STATUS immediately after sending this
message.
The current plan is to release the first Apache beta on Friday December
22. That also means that APR is basically hitting beta status, at least
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The Apache Group has looked at Cygwin before. We do not plan to include
> support for Cygwin right now. That may change in the future, but we
> dislike the license.
Just as an FYI-aside: Apache 2.0 and APR actually *do* build and run correctly
almost out
of the b
> > Nak, no, you cannot incorporate cygwin on win32 for apr/apache,
> > and, no, Win32 doesn't run ./configure, and no, we don't expect
> > anyone on win32 to handle installation of anything beyond the
> > easy-to-install activestate perl, or we incoroporate the Lucient
> > licensed awk. Apr
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > I guess I don't follow the logic there. How exactly would Windows
> > developers run the configure script if they did not have Cygwin
> > installed? Last I checked, perl did not read sh files, so you
> > would need to have a version of /bin/sh o
