Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:42:28 +0200 From: Clement Laforet <sheepkiller@cultdeadsheep.org> To: SimosNap Administrator <admin@simosnap.org> Cc: apache@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: www/apache22 Message-ID: <20090802204228.GB47798@goofy.cultdeadsheep.org> In-Reply-To: <4A73756A.7090106@simosnap.org> References: <4A73756A.7090106@simosnap.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --]
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 12:51:22AM +0200, SimosNap Administrator wrote:
> I'm using WITH_MPM=itk option but every portupgrade i need to recompile
> adding this option by hand.
WITH_MPM, dispite its name, was originally designed to live in /etc/make.conf and
to solve 2 problems:
1. expose to whole ports tree which MPM is currently in use when ${APACHE_MPM}
can't be retrieved
2. ease of integration of custom MPM (just copy the patch in files/
directory and define WITH_MPM, or create a slave port).
I know, apache stuff is a bit complex and was designed to fit my needs:
- apache HTTPd "flavours" == slave ports
- want to add a new mpm ? -> slave port
(That's the real reason we have APACHE_PORT variable)
I plead guilty: I should have made a slave port for mpm-itk.
> Why not adding this option to the make menu config ?
I never think about this. Exposing MPMs to OPTIONS framework is, to me, a
PITA.
> Why not apache22
> does not matain old compile option ?
AFAIK, no port relies on installed version. It would be a giant
mistake to do this.
> Is very annoing this .
We'll think about it but, since I usually put WITH_MPM=XXX in
/etc/make.conf or pkgtools.conf, I was never concerned about this issue.
thanks,
clem
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAkp1+jQACgkQsRhfjwcjuh07XwCgkUGWpGHRlNZo/2iBJOHIt5D8
JigAn2yChPv56DAzO8Fo7axa8wH4+dG+
=Twde
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090802204228.GB47798>