[ITP] Apache 2.0
Mon Jun 20 08:42:00 GMT 2005
On Jun 20 01:57, Max Bowsher wrote:
> There doesn't seem to be any particular consensus between Linux distros on
> whether the package should be called "apache2" or "httpd".
> I have chosen to follow the naming of the official tarball, and call it
> "httpd". (Red Hat/Fedora does the same, FWIW)
I like "apache2" better, FWIW.
> Setup.exe URL:
> Other URLs:
> sdesc: "Apache HTTPD 2.0"
> ldesc: "The Apache Software Foundation HTTP Server"
> category: Net Web
> requires: cygwin libaprutil0 libapr0
Packaging looks mostly good but the following makes me wonder.
That looks wrong to me. AFAICS, httpd2 is linked against usr/sbin/cyghttpd2core.so.
This leads to a couple of questions.
- Why is the library not in /usr/bin as every other shared lib which is load-time linked?
- Why is it called .so? I have no problems with run-time linked modules called .so, we
already have a couple of these, but I'm reluctant to call load-time linked libs .so.
Did you test it on 9x? I know for sure that you can call executables "foo" instead
of "foo.exe" on NT, but the same doesn't work on 9x. What about load-time linked DLLs?
- Why are the *.dlla. and *.la files in /usr/sbin? They belong under /usr/lib, don't they?
One minor problem with your setup.hint. htdbm2 is linked against libcrypt. The dependency
is missing. THis is minor, because the package dependency is given indirectly through the
libaprutil0 dependency, but I'd add it for completness.
Besides from that, many thanks for packaging apache2!
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:email@example.com
Red Hat, Inc.
More information about the Cygwin-apps