>the use of that account isn't a problem... we just wondered who sent >the patch :)
;) it's just me >> What do you think of the patches ? I know that IBM allready >> do the Apache 2.0 port from Apache 2.0beta18, and it works >> fine on AS/400, but since the IBM fellows port was not donated >> to ASF, to be included in standard distro, I decided to spend >> a little time to works on that port. > >they're small, and that's nice... they looked weird in the mail >client I was using though... It's the preliminary part, some adds needed to have autoconf recognise AS/400 - OS/400. >as far as the AS/400 folks... they have sent their changes to folks >in my department at IBM (who are more in the mainstream Apache >development)... frankly, I found it far too much to digest at once >and have been too lazy^H^H^H^Hbusy to do anything with it I'll be interested getting a copy of it, just to avoid me spending many times on closed road. >also, they've posted some fixes to dev@[apr|httpd].apache.org... > >> Yes it's stupid to duplicate works but I'd like to have the >> original Apache 2.0 on my iSeries from the main source and >> repository, and not just to respect the OSS spirit of ASF. >> But, may be, some of you could try some lobbying on IBM officials >> and managers to commit the AS/400 patches back to original CVS >> for both APR and Apache 2.0 > >I don't think any lobbying is necessary. They know it is in their >best interest. But note that their code base is a lot older, with >many things changed since then. Also, their goal was to get a stable, >tested product out in a particular timeframe, not go through the >political+technical minefield of getting patches committed. The >results are surely different. The global goal is to be able to rebuild Apache 2.0 from tarball to any decent AS/400, and IBM have done some good works by porting some GNU tools, like gmake and the icc (CRTCMOD compiler wrapper). >If you've made good progress towards getting current code ported to >AS/400, and you can post it in bite-sized chunks for us to understand, >then let's concentrate on that. As I said I'm in preliminary stage, having configure part working and continue as time permit. And yes, I'll be interested in having access to patches provided by Rochester Folks (Hi Ho Minnesota friends). >As I mentioned before, I'm curious about how far along you are. If >you are at the state of APR recognizing that it is AS/400 but nothing >works, then I personally won't spend any time looking at the patches >until you're further along. Others may take a different approach. Porting on AS/400 is not so easy (a really different system for a Unix child) and there is still lack of many usefull tool (like autoconf) but with gnutools port, it's possible. >I hope this doesn't sound like any sort of gauntlet. If we weren't >interested in your work we wouldn't have bothered commenting on your >post. Thanks for your support, I'll continue on it and tell you regulary the progress :) I saw your interest, and I'm more than happy.
