Re: apr-util comments

2000-12-06 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 02:28:31PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... All I'm asking for is the symbol name, is APR_UTIL_DECLARE too wordy (and if so, would we rather use APU_DECLARE or APRU_DECLARE?, or even AU_DECLARE) I guess if we need another one, I would suggest APU_DECLARE. I'm

RE: APRUTIL prefix

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: From: Roy T. Fielding [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I am still categorically opposed to any prefix other than ap_ for any symbols in any C library that is based on code developed by the Apache projects. Including apr and apr-util, though I

Re: cvs commit: apr-util Makefile.in

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
No, distclean means clean the directories in preparation of a release. For example, the one for rsync does distclean: clean rm -f config.h config.cache config.status Makefile I have seen reallyclean used as a target to remove all generated files, but it isn't a standard

Re: cvs commit: apr-util Makefile.in

2000-12-06 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 04:38:27PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have three levels of cleaning that need to be expressed: 1) clean out the .o files [before rebuilding] 2) clean out the results of running ./configure (restore everything to the same point that you unpacked

Re: cvs commit: apr-util Makefile.in

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
1) clean out the .o files [before rebuilding] 2) clean out the results of running ./configure (restore everything to the same point that you unpacked apache.org/dist/aprutil-1.0.tar.gz) 3) return to the point right after a CVS checkout Step 2 does not exist in Apache as it now

Re: cvs commit: apr-util/src/dbm Makefile.in apr_dbm.c

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
*) move building of aprutil.exports into the top-level Makefile so that we can use APR's directory (rather than needing to pass it to buildconf.sh) You can't do this. We need this file when running buildconf in Apache, and it doesn't make any sense to do this each time we build

Re: cvs commit: apr-util/src/dbm Makefile.in apr_dbm.c

2000-12-06 Thread Jeff Trawick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: *) move building of aprutil.exports into the top-level Makefile so that we can use APR's directory (rather than needing to pass it to buildconf.sh) You can't do this. We need this file when running buildconf in Apache, and it doesn't make any sense to

Re: cvs commit: apr-util/src/buckets ap_buckets_eos.c ap_buckets_file.c ap_buckets_flush.c ap_buckets_heap.c ap_buckets_mmap.c ap_buckets_pipe.c ap_buckets_pool.c ap_buckets_simple.c ap_buckets_socket.c

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
On 6 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An alternate way to fix this problem is to explicitly break the bucket type out of the type structure in ap_bucketi and represent each bucket type with an enum. We have been over this. This was part of the original design for the buckets. Using

Re: cvs commit: apr-util/src/dbm Makefile.in apr_dbm.c

2000-12-06 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 07:03:19PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *) move building of aprutil.exports into the top-level Makefile so that we can use APR's directory (rather than needing to pass it to buildconf.sh) You can't do this. We need this file when running buildconf in

Re: cvs commit: apr-util/src/dbm Makefile.in apr_dbm.c

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
The file will only be built once. If you do a make extraclean, then it will need to be built again. If the thing is built once, then it shouldn't really matter whether it is built at buildconf.sh or make time. But it breaks the first time you try to configure Apache. That's no good. Plus,

Re: cvs commit: apr-util/src/dbm Makefile.in apr_dbm.c

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
By moving it into the Makefile, we have access to the APR directory. The parameter to buildconf.sh is a bit strange... our other buildconf scripts don't do it (nor does autogen.sh in SVN). In some cases, APR can be found by the configure script automatically, so nobody would need to pass

Re: apr-util comments

2000-12-06 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 03:38:45PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: ... Why do we add the additional complexity of a src/ directory within apr-util? Can't we keep to the same simplicity as apr itself? Suggesting, therefore, that we aught to have apr-util/buckets rather than

RE: apr-util comments

2000-12-06 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
From: Greg Stein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 1:32 PM On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 03:38:45PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: ... Why do we add the additional complexity of a src/ directory within apr-util? Can't we keep to the same simplicity as apr itself?

Re: apr-util comments

2000-12-06 Thread Greg Stein
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:51:59PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: From: Greg Stein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 1:32 PM On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 03:38:45PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: ... Why do we add the additional complexity of a src/

Re: apr-util comments

2000-12-06 Thread rbb
Two reasons: 1) we locate all the objects to add to the library using find. it is easier to find them under src/ rather than enumerating each source subdir. We can't use . because that would pick up test/. This hasn't been an object in APR. I would prefer to enumerate the subdirs to