I recompiled again with no ssl support same error. Looks like htpasswd.c is
in need of something it doesn't have. I'm not sure why it's upset. Any help
is appreciated.
--
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-796-9023
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gonyou, Austin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 2:48 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: httpd-2.0.18 build error
>
>
> Looks like this is caused by configuring with ssl support.
> Any ideas here,
> aside from not compiling with SSL?
>
> --------------begin error--------------
> /bin/sh
> /home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/srclib/apr/libtool --silent
> --mode=link gcc -g -O2 -pthread -D_REENTRANT
> -DAP_HAVE_DESIGNATED_INITIALIZER -I.
> -I/home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/os/unix
> -I/home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/server/mpm/threaded
> -I/home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/modules/http
> -I/home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/include
> -I/home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/srclib/apr/include
> -I/home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/srclib/apr-util/include
> -I../openssl-0.9.6//include -export-dynamic -o htpasswd htpasswd.lo
> ../srclib/apr-util/libaprutil.la ../srclib/apr/libapr.la
> -lnsl -lnsl -lm
> -lcrypt -lnsl -ldl -lssl -lcrypto
> /home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/srclib/apr-util/xml/expat
> /lib/libexpat.
> la
> htpasswd.o: In function `main':
> /home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/support/htpasswd.c:599:
> the use of
> `tmpnam' is dangerous, better use `mkstemp'
> htpasswd.o: In function `mkrecord':
> /home/austin/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/support/htpasswd.c:235: undefined
> reference to `apr_sha1_base64'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> make[2]: *** [htpasswd] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/support'
> make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/work/build/httpd-2_0_18/support'
> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> --------------end error-------------------
>
> --
> Austin Gonyou
> Systems Architect, CCNA
> Coremetrics, Inc.
> Phone: 512-796-9023
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gonyou, Austin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 2:01 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
> >
> >
> > Aye Aye. They are up.
> >
> > --
> > Austin Gonyou
> > Systems Architect, CCNA
> > Coremetrics, Inc.
> > Phone: 512-796-9023
> > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:19 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Apache 2.0 final ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Check now. They are up.
> > >
> > > Bill
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Gonyou, Austin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 11:59 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Where the heck is 2.0.18 for download? CVS?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Austin Gonyou
> > > > Systems Architect, CCNA
> > > > Coremetrics, Inc.
> > > > Phone: 512-796-9023
> > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Ian Holsman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:32 AM
> > > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > > > Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Daniel,
> > > > > we are already devleoping custom modules for 2.0,
> > > > > ok.. sometimes we get a bit burnt and have to go and change
> > > > > some function names when something gets pulled into the APR,
> > > > >
> > > > > but in my experience the change is to a function name,
> > the concept
> > > > > stays the same, and is a low-risk change.
> > > > >
> > > > > I sugest you grab the 2.0.19 release (when it gets
> > pushed to BETA)
> > > > > and use that as a baseline, subscribe to the CVS
> > mailing list and
> > > > > take a note when you see comments like 'changed function
> > > > > name' or 'moved to APR'
> > > > >
> > > > > ..Ian
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Padwa, Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 6:42 AM
> > > > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think people like him are asking: when is the fiddling
> > > > > > done, and people
> > > > > > > have a program they can start to incorporate into their
> > > > > > operating system
> > > > > > > releases, deploy for production customers, etc? While
> > > > > > we're still working
> > > > > > > on low-level issues like pools/sms in APR and
> fixing other
> > > > > > big performance
> > > > > > > issues, we're not there yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another spin on the same question: when do the core
> > > > > > developers (you know who
> > > > > > you are) think that the internal APIs have
> stabilized enough
> > > > > > so that effort
> > > > > > expended porting home-grown modules won't need to be thrown
> > > > > > away when 2.0
> > > > > > settles down?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some of us (I don't have enough data to say "many")
> can't put
> > > > > > the server
> > > > > > through heavy burn-in without local modules, and can't
> > > > > > justify porting those
> > > > > > to a not-settled set of core APIs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Or did I miss the announcement that we had passed
> this point?
> > > > > > It doesn't
> > > > > > need to be an unbreakable promise, just some guidance.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
