[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: apr-iconv

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: 2003-02-25 21:42:00 CET

SteveKing wrote:

>>I'd say complain to Microsoft. If shared libs compiled with one version
>>of the compiler are useless for programs that are compiled with the
>>other, that's MS's problem, not ours. Well, theoretically, anyway...
>>
>>
>
>Not that easy.
>
Yes :-(

>>Alternatively, you could
>>teach apr-iconv on Windows to use the dirname of the module filename as
>>an alternative search path for the conversion modules, if APR_ICONV_PATH
>>isn't defined.
>>
>>
>I would do that the other way around: if the modules are present in the
>application
>subfolder then definitely use those ('cause the app installed and was
>tested against those) and only if they're not there _then_ use the ones on
>the APR_ICONV_PATH.
>
Yes, that would be acceptable, I guess.

>>>Just not set the env-variable and force
>>>the installer to copy those files to the
>>>subfolder "iconv"?
>>>
>>>Suggestions?
>>>
>>>
>>I would definitely like to see a solution that leta _all_ Subversion
>>clients share the same apr-iconv conversion modules, preferably the ones
>>installed with Apache (if you happen to have Apache installed). If that
>>means downgrading to MSVC6 for all released binaries, then so be it.
>>
>>
>
>Sorry, but that isn't possible. VS.NET came with many enhancements which
>my client uses. So compiling isn't possible with VC6 - at least not with
>major changes in the sourcecode. And I don't like the idea of reinventing the
>wheel i.e. code myself what's already done in the libs which come with VS.NET.
>
Well, that's your fault for tieing yourself to a single vendor. Never a
smart move, as you've noticed.

>Sure it would save some space on the harddisk if all clients would share
>the same modules, but today's hd's are big enough.
>
You're not looking at all the angles. If you try to load "foo.so", and
Windows notices that a DLL with this name is already loaded -- no matter
where it came from -- it'll skip loading the file and bind your program
with the one in menory. Boom.

> And I don't like the
>idea that my client depends on modules which came with whatever other
>program - no one can guarantee that those modules will work.
>
Have you ever heard of DLL versioning? It's there specifically to avoid
these sorts of problems

> So since
>all clients must have those modules packed in the installer anyway (since
>it's possible that _no_ other program installed those yet) I think it's
>always best to install them and use those.
>
If you're so worried about that, then I suggest you link everything
statically. It wouldn't take more than a day or so to teach apr-iconv to
bind the conversion modules into the library proper.

>And for a client you don't have to install the whole apache server.
>
Sure, that's why we bundle the .so's. If you _do_ have the right version
of Apache installed, though, it would definitely be nice to use the same
iconv modules.

-- 
Brane Čibej   <brane_at_xbc.nu>   http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Feb 25 21:42:44 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.