On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 07:41:00PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: > Paul Querna wrote: > >I believe we should still bundle APR and APR-Util with HTTPd, but we > >should only use the released versions of each. > > > >This will keep it easy for end users, because APR will still be bundled > >in our Source Distribution.
+1 to shipping the sources in the tarball. In principle I like the idea of only shipping apr from a release tag, but it adds a significant burden if there needs to be an httpd security release for an apr issue. I think we need to demonstrate that we can ship APR releases more often than once a year first. > I think this will cause more problems than it solves, I would prefer to > see APR no longer bundled with httpd v2.2 onwards. > > APR is now GA, and is available as a standalone package. It is also used > by other packages, like subversion etc. If APR is installed as standard > on a system, which APR does httpd use? The system one? The bundled one? This is precisely dictated by APR_FIND_APR and how it's used. Not bundling the apr and apr-util sources just takes away user choice, and I don't see any justification for doing that. > Getting httpd v2.1 built as an RPM is currently broken, due to the > bundled APR clashing with a system APR. APR is it's own project, there > is no longer any need to bundle it with httpd. That is purely a packaging issue and need not influence what goes in the tarball. You can easily make httpd.spec work with either an installed or bundled apr based on an rpmbuild --with-blah flag, if you like. Or just pick one behaviour and make it work. joe
