Henri Gomez wrote: > Costin Manolache wrote: > >> Henri Gomez wrote: >> >> >>> More comments on APR and JK2. >>> >>> While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also >>> jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 >>> built with JNI support. >> >> >> >> Do you have a multithreaded apache1.3 ? It's very important >> to compile it as multithreaded and link pthread ! > > > No but added the LoadModule pthread directive. > >> For the apr issues - I still think that apr should be treated as a >> general-purpose library, and we shouldn't have more than one varaiant >> in the system. > > > Yes
For the moment that is not the case. For example you may need an APR with threads and another without. > >> Probably some APR expert could clarify this - but my opinion is that >> on linux the right place for apr is /usr/lib/libapr.so.0.9.2 >> and /usr/include/apr. > > > When you create an Apache 2.0.42, apr shared lib goes in /usr/lib, with > /usr/lib/libapr.so.0.9.2. The includes goes in /usr/include/apache2. > > When you're just build apr/apr-util, you should put them elsewhere to > avoid collision with the one which are provided by apache2. > > If you don't do this, you'll have a strange situation where you have > to specify that you need apache2 to build apache 1.3 jk2 ! > > Also as I said the shared/static libs which came from apr 0.9.1 have > major version in name, libapr-0.so, libaprutil-0.so... > >> And I think Apache2.0 RPM should just depend on libapr.rpm, and same >> for mod_jk2.rpm > > > I seems you could build Apache 2.0.42 against an allready > present APR shared lib, and trying it right now but I still wonder > why Apache 2.0.42 bundle an APR 0.9.2 where only APR 0.9.1 is available > as release. We should ask httpd dev list. > >> It's just too confusing to have 2 variants of the same library, >> and it should be a portability library that can be used outside >> apache - without apache having a special copy. > > > I agree, but it's something which should be fixed by Apache 2.0 and > APR teams, ie make Apache 2.0 use the latest APR release (0.9.1 or 0.9.2 > ?). > > May be JF could do something for us and also ask why the apr goes with > the -0 in names.... To allow different versions of apr. For example if you could have Apache 2.0 using APR 0.9.2 and subversion using APR 1.0.0. > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
