On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 09:40:44PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > We still need to APR namespace protection. We tried to not namespace > protect things to begin with, and Apache and APR were conflicting > horribly.
Because the method I described was not used. > Add to that, that we define our own macros that no other > package should have. That is a separate issue -- anything that is defined by an APR-specific macro should be name-protected. I am only talking about the standard names that every autoconf package defines. > We have been down the road of exposing non-namespace protected macros > before, it didn't work then, and I don't believe it will work now. Please > take a look at the archive from when we first put autoconf into APR, > and how it conflicted with Apache. As I mentioned when I started the build blues thread, I read the archives first. Most of the decisions back then were made because APR had to be integrated with a non-configure-based httpd. I have the benefit of hindsight and a holistic view of the build system, so it shouldn't be too surprising that I can think of a solution that may not have been possible back then. The reason I bring it up right now is because every step we have taken away from a standard autoconf setup has resulted in significant problems on one platform or another, leading to another step away and more problems, ad nauseum. Some steps, like not using the standard generating mechanism for the Makefile files, have benefits that outweigh the pain. Others do not. ....Roy
