no! no! leave apachectl to behave as it always has done. could someone consider vetoing this argument based on backwards compatibility?
-- James > > gregames 2002/07/23 11:04:23 > > Modified: . STATUS > Log: > vote on wrapper scripts > > Keeping apachectl simple seems desirable. The tasks listed for httpd.sh > seem reasonable too. > > Revision Changes Path > 1.705 +2 -2 httpd-2.0/STATUS > > Index: STATUS > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/STATUS,v > retrieving revision 1.704 > retrieving revision 1.705 > diff -u -r1.704 -r1.705 > --- STATUS 23 Jul 2002 17:44:55 -0000 1.704 > +++ STATUS 23 Jul 2002 18:04:23 -0000 1.705 > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ > httpd.sh should be the wrapper for httpd which sources envvars > and allows any options to be passed through > > - +1: trawick > + +1: trawick, gregames > > * Should we always build [support*] binaries statically > unless otherwise > indicated? > > > >
