Seema Did we check how it is done on other distribution like Debian (who does split these into separate packages) ? I am sure, there will be quite a number of apache modules - that require some header files from apr and the rest from apr-util . have a complex configure script (with using CFLAGS) can be quite a bit of pain. Already, we do make things quite hard by not keeping these header files under /usr/include - like being commonly done on other linux distributions..
- Sriram Seema Alevoor wrote: > > > On 07/08/09 08:26, Jyri Virkki wrote: >> Sriram Natarajan wrote: >>> extensions like these depend on various apr header files. while some >>> of them reside within apr while the rest deliver within apr-util >>> package. now, if we had both apr/apr-util (even if it is a separate >>> package) deliver its header files under /usr/apr/1.3 , things would >>> have been lot easier rather what we have now - /usr/apr/1.3 and >>> /usr/apr-util/1.3 >> >> Ah, don't know|remember why the file layout split. Hopefully others >> can comment what led to it. > > The main reason was that apr and apr-util were two different projects > with > different release cycles. Hence, the current layout was proposed to > support > apr 1.3 and apr-util 1.4 like scenarios ! > > > -- Seema. > > >>> Just to clarify - i am not questioning as to why we split these >>> packages >> >> Re-read your Subject line to see why the confusion ;-) >> >> >>
