From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Jan 7 23:25: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from m0.cs.berkeley.edu (m0.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.45.176]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD94E15246; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 23:25:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca7-252.ix.netcom.com [209.109.235.252]) by m0.cs.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA06493; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 23:24:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id XAA60519; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 23:20:41 -0800 (PST) To: itojun@iijlab.net Cc: sumikawa@ebina.hitachi.co.jp, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPv6-enable ports References: <17129.947298822@coconut.itojun.org> From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 07 Jan 2000 23:19:26 -0800 In-Reply-To: itojun@iijlab.net's message of "Sat, 08 Jan 2000 11:33:42 +0900" Message-ID: Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: itojun@iijlab.net * Yes, the plan looks fine. * * In most cases ports falls into the former category. * I know of very few examples for the latter. That's good. You can take this as my "ok" to go ahead and start fixing the ports (after asking the maintainers, of course). * I give you one example: apache. Though apache6 works for both IPv4/v6, * we may need to have apache and apache6 separately, because: * - apache IPv6 patch needs to change internal C structure definition, * which *may* break 3rd party modules (I've never seen breakage though) * - there are many ports that depends on (normal) apache * - and apache is very famous and breakage is not allowed :-) Don't tell me you need apache13+ipv6 and apache13-modssl+ipv6 and .... ;) Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message