| - the output of `apr-X-config --ld-flags' will always be .../lib or
| .../lib64, depending on which version of apr-X-config was installed
| most recently
You should not add the -L path if it's part of the system
search path as that'll confuse gcc in some cases.
In my case, apr is
daniel.poc...@barclayscapital.com wrote:
| - the output of `apr-X-config --ld-flags' will always be .../lib or
| .../lib64, depending on which version of apr-X-config was installed
| most recently
You should not add the -L path if it's part of the system
search path as that'll
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 05:48:24PM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
Daniel Pocock wrote:
- alternatively, have different versions of apr-X-config, e.g.
apr-2-config-x86_64 or apr-2-config-64; the end user would need to make
sure that they invoked the right one
-1. If we want apr-2-trueconfig
]] Daniel Pocock
| The only variation to gcc is the -64 flag - this should be transparent,
| you should have to do nothing special until you overload your box with
| multiple flavors.
|
| The real issue is not the -64 flag - that is usually added by the
| configure script that is calling
I notice that the spec file installs apr*config to bindir
Makefile.in declares the filename:
APR_CONFIG = apr-$(APR_MAJOR_VERSION)-config
However, on an x86_64 platform, it may be necessary to install both 32
and 64 bit packages concurrently.
On RHEL, the 64 bit libraries can go under
Daniel Pocock wrote:
I notice that the spec file installs apr*config to bindir
Makefile.in declares the filename:
APR_CONFIG = apr-$(APR_MAJOR_VERSION)-config
However, on an x86_64 platform, it may be necessary to install both 32
and 64 bit packages concurrently.
On RHEL, the 64 bit
Daniel Pocock wrote:
I notice that the spec file installs apr*config to bindir
Makefile.in declares the filename:
APR_CONFIG = apr-$(APR_MAJOR_VERSION)-config
However, on an x86_64 platform, it may be necessary to install both 32
and 64 bit packages concurrently.
On RHEL, the 64 bit
The only variation to gcc is the -64 flag - this should be transparent,
you should have to do nothing special until you overload your box with
multiple flavors.
The real issue is not the -64 flag - that is usually added by the
configure script that is calling apr-X-config anyway. The real
Daniel Pocock wrote:
- depending upon how fussy the packaging system is, it may not be
thrilled about one package overwriting another package's files - RHEL
hasn't complained about this, but maybe future versions will be more
attentive to such issues
They were plenty attentive; their
Daniel Pocock wrote:
- depending upon how fussy the packaging system is, it may not be
thrilled about one package overwriting another package's files - RHEL
hasn't complained about this, but maybe future versions will be more
attentive to such issues
They were plenty attentive; their
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 14:14 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
The only thing that seems out of place is apr-1-config, as there is no
bin64 or bin32 directory. If the 32 bit and 64 bit packages are
installed concurrently, then one of them overwrites the other's
apr-1-config.
You can have a look at
11 matches
Mail list logo
