Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 21:25:53 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <vinschen AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [ANN] apache_1.3.22 package available for setup inclusion
Message-ID: <20020109212553.D12057@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <3C3BFC4C DOT 15C3C81A AT wapme-systems DOT de> <885801411 DOT 20020109124743 AT familiehaase DOT de> <3C3C5978 DOT 20076688 AT wapme-systems DOT de> <20020109160306 DOT C21035 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3C3C5F22 DOT 6E3D8286 AT wapme-systems DOT de> <20020109162447 DOT E21035 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3C3C655D DOT 9040708 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3C3C655D.9040708@ece.gatech.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i

On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 10:44:29AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> However, I don't think it TRULY matters where dlopen'ed DLLs live -- 
> except that users should not have to add /usr/libexec (or 
> /usr/lib/perl5/cygwin-multi/auto/ByteLoader/ and 
> /usr/lib/perl5/cygwin-multi/auto/Data/Dumper/ and ...) to their path. 
> Also, I do not think that private, dlopened, 
> not-in-the-public-bin-directory DLLs should be forced to follow the 
> cygXXXX.dll nomenclature.  XXXX.dll, libXXXX.dll, whatever.  They're 
> *private* -- who cares what they are named (although .dll is kindof a 
> necessity due to windows runtime loader and dlopen issues)

It actually doesn't matter.  But since the default path for
libexecdir isn't /usr/libexec but /usr/sbin it should go to
/usr/sbin.  Or better /usr/lib.  Or even better, perhaps,
/usr/lib/httpd, /usr/share/httpd, ...

> The fact is, many packages put private, non-linkable, 
> unusable-except-by-themselves shared libs into some private structure. 
> Like perl does.  This is okay, IMO.

Sure.

> However, packages that do this should not require "external assistance" 
> to find those dlopen'ed shared libs.  Either they should be dlopen'ed 
> using the full path, or main() should add the requisite directories to 
> the PATH -- but only for its process space, not globally.

Agree.

> So, IMO it's fine if apache puts its private, dlopen'ed DLLs into 
> /usr/libexec/apache/modules or whereever -- but it should not require 
> that /usr/libexec/apache/modules be added to the global PATH.

Except for `libexec', agree.

> Now, if apache's httpd.exe is inherently linked to LOTS of mod_*.dll 
> shared libs -- instead of dlopen'ing them -- then I think that's a poor 
> design decision and apache needs a bit more work to change that to using 
> dlopen for the module-related DLL's...otherwise, where's the benefit of 
> using DLL's?  You still need to relink httpd.exe every time you add a 
> new module...might as well use static libs.

Agree.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.