Greg Stein wrote:
Ouch...
-1 on this commit, pending further explanation. I'm loathe to see all of
that extra code go in there for a dubious performance benefit. Are you
*truly* saving any time? I see a while() loop in there copying data. Isn't
it almost always faster to let the compiler produce an
libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it
needs to be.
The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4.
Subversion has been on libtool 1.4 since last October. After some initial
grumbling, there h
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> jerenkrantz02/05/14 00:35:58
>
> Modified:buildapr_common.m4
> Log:
> Add APR_MKDIR_P_CHECK macro based on httpd-2.0's APACHE_MKDIR_P_CHECK.
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.32 +20 -0 apr/build/apr_common.m4
Are
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 09:28:03AM +0100, Thom May wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> > jerenkrantz02/05/14 00:35:58
> >
> > Modified:buildapr_common.m4
> > Log:
> > Add APR_MKDIR_P_CHECK macro based on httpd-2.0's APACHE_MKDIR_P_CHECK.
> >
> > Revisi
"Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
> some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it
> needs to be.
>
> The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4.
>
> Subversion has been on libtool 1.4 si
> From IRC, I already have a +1 from Justin and Sander. So I'd say we have
> enough positive traction for the move. But does anybody see any *problems*
> or have a reason to *not* require 1.4 ?
PHP has required 1.4.x for months and our latest distributions
are based on it; no problems so f
Greg Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
> some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it
> needs to be.
>
> The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4.
Two concerns:
1) libtool 1.4.2 fails on H
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> I think it would simplify our life, and give us proper dependencies, yet not
> cause any undue burden (libtool 1.4 has been out for a long while now...)
>
> >From IRC, I already have a +1 from Justin and Sander. So I'd say we have
> enough positive traction for the move. But
>
> > At the same time, the brigade_write() family can be tricky to maintain at
> > times. It's much better than it used to be (now that
> > check_brigade_flush() has been burned at the stake), though.
> >
> > So the real question is this: is it ever possible for strlen()+memcpy() to
> > be faste
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
> some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it
> needs to be.
>
> The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4.
Are there any platform
On Tue, 14 May 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
> > some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it
> > needs to be.
> >
> > The simple ans
> > Are there any platforms do _not_ support libtool 1.4 or have problems
> > with it? What about specific versions of 1.4 (like 1.4.2 on AIX for
> > example)? If so, I don't want to get in to the version nightmare that
> > projects like PHP have gotten themselves in to. OTOH, if we can minimize
>
Jeff Trawick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The simple answer is to require libtool 1.4.
>
> Two concerns:
>
> 1) libtool 1.4.2 fails on HP-UX. One of the Apache tarballs was
>created with libtool 1.4.2 but it didn't work on HP-UX. Maybe
>1.4.x works on HP-UX.
I was unable to recreat
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:45:37AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
> > some of the dependency stuff in apr(-util) a bit more complicated than it
> > needs to be.
>
> PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool,
> autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on
> occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is
> up with your slackware?).
Most likely a broken vendor installation of at least one
Just bringing this little dialogue into the public eye.
"Sander Striker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 13 May 2002 02:08
>
> > I'm trying to piece something together here regarding Issue #622. I
> > did a checkout of a copy of the su
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool,
> autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on
> occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is
> up with your slackware?).
For what's it's worth, that's not been
This patch is a first cut at enabling the libtool intra-library
dependency code for httpd-2.0, apr, and apr-util. This is part of
the rationale for switching to libtool-1.4. It compiles fine here
with libtool-1.4.2 on Linux.
AIUI, this would not work on libtool-1.3. So, if someone who has
1.3 c
On Tue, 14 May 2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > PHP seems to require a magic combination of versions for libtool,
> > autoconf, and automake that allow it to build properly, and can on
> > occasion freak out if you don't have the right combo (Cliff, what is
> > up with your slackware?).
>
> Mo
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 09:56:12AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> This patch is a first cut at enabling the libtool intra-library
> dependency code for httpd-2.0, apr, and apr-util. This is part of
> the rationale for switching to libtool-1.4. It compiles fine here
> with libtool-1.4.2 on Linu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just bringing this little dialogue into the public eye.
"Sander Striker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 May 2002 02:08
I'm trying to piece something together here regarding Issue #622. I
did a checkout of a copy of th
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 11:15:18AM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:45:37AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:44:33AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > libtool 1.3 has problems with intra-library dependencies. This is making
> > > some of the dependenc
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 11:48:06AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > The FreeBSD ports tree doesn't yet support libtool 1.4 (it's an
>
> 'ports' may not have it, but libtool 1.4 works fine on FreeBSD. Ben
> Collins-Sussman and yourself build Subversion on FreeBSD all the time, and
> that requires 1.4.
> main/internal_functions.c was never generated. Now at least it would get
> built by the Makefile if it *did* exist, which is more than used to
> happen.
Do you see a line "creating main/internal_functions.c" when
running configure?
If yes, please send me the output of configure, af
"Sander Striker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, consecutive blocks aren't joined together to form a bigger
> block. In other words, you might have one big chunk of mem that could
> satisfy your allocation, but the allocator won't see it and gets new
> (unfragmented) mem.
>
> For these issues
25 matches
Mail list logo
