I can see more than two problems with the current setup - especially
since the whole autoconf/automake is broken.
Some time ago I proposed a different setup, also in order to port Rivet
for Apache2 more effectively. My proposal is to split the distribution
in 3 parts (or two parts): The Rivet/Tcl extension, the common TclWeb
related things and the two modules for Apache1.x and Apache2.x.
The question is, how appropriate it is to separate the Tclweb stuff (the
files in src/ directly) from the modules... but I definitely think that
the Rivet Tcl extension should evolve separately from the modules.
That would make the maintenance much easier - for the Rivet Tcl
extension, the standard TEA platform can be utilized, as available
through anonymous CVS from
http://tcl.cvs.sourceforge.net/tcl/sampleextension/
For the modules, the apache/libtool stuff can be used, described e.g. in
the tutorial here:
http://threebit.net/tutorials/apache2_modules/tut1/tutorial1.html
I think this makes it easier to ensure that the libs are correctly in
place during install. It would require to start the configuration from
scratch, and maybe to do a completely fresh svn import with the new
setup. But then, it would at least be possible to continue the work on
the Apache2.x port effectively and maintain the other things. So it's a
single, relatively small step (since the current setup does not work
anyway) with a big benefit.
If you're willing to have a stab at this, I'll make sure that it gets
into the HEAD.
--
David N. Welton
- http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Linux, Open Source Consulting
- http://www.dedasys.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
