Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2000 15:05:04 +0100 From: Dirk Froemberg <dirk@freebsd.org> To: Vincent Poy <vince@venus.GAIANET.NET> Cc: "Scot W. Hetzel" <hetzels@westbend.net>, Patrick Bihan-Faou <patrick@mindstep.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, ache@freebsd.org, rse@engelschall.com, adam@algroup.co.uk Subject: Re: ports/15873: New Apache_fp+php+mod_ssl-1.3.9+3.0.12+2.4.8 port. Message-ID: <20000108150504.B76402@physik.TU-Berlin.DE> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0001051943250.20208-100000@venus.GAIANET.NET>; from vince@venus.GAIANET.NET on Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 07:44:30PM -0800 References: <015d01bf57ef$34afcd00$8dfee0d1@westbend.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0001051943250.20208-100000@venus.GAIANET.NET>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 07:44:30PM -0800, Vincent Poy wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jan 2000, Scot W. Hetzel wrote: > > > To me the ideal situation would be: > > > - a simple apache port (apache13) > > > - a new port category (maybe) for the apache modules where I could find > > > mod_ssl, mod_php, mod_frontpage, mod_xyz, etc. > > > > > > This way I could choose exactly the apache configuration I need/want. > > > > > > This is exactly why I created a "mod_dav" port as opposed to a > > > "apache-mod_dav-xxx" port. It would be really great if you could do the > > same > > > with the mod_frontpage module. > > > > > As the original creator of the Apache13-fp port, it is not currently > > possible to seperate the mod_frontpage module from the Apache Server. The > > reason for this is the mod_frontpage requires certain patches be applied to > > the Apache Server before it gets compiled. > > > > Mod_SSL is also in the same situation as it requires the EAPI patches to be > > applied to the Apache Server. > > > > It is possible to come up with a one Apache Server solution, but it will > > require that the FrontPage patches (patch-f?), EAPI patches, etc be applied > > and compiled with the Apache port. > > > > Then Apache Module ports for mod_fronpage, mod_ssl can be created which > > compiles these modules as DSO. > > > > Also, the httpd.conf needs a way for adding new DSO to it. > > > > HINT: NetBSD ports tree is already doing this for the mod_ssl, php* ports. > > Wouldn't a good way to do it be to simply implement front page > extensions into the apache13+php3 port since one can select the modules > and option one wants built into the server. Yes, from a technical point of view, it would be easy to integrate Frontpage extensions to apache13-php3 and make the php part optional, too. Then we would have merged apache13, apache13-fp, apache13-modssl and apache13-php3 into one port. We would have to decide how to deal with apache13-ssl, then. I asked about such integration about a year ago. The maintainer of apache13-modssl stated that he'd like to keep a seperate port for modssl. IIRC the maintainer of apache13 wanted to stay independent, too. This has to be respected of course. So I think the major problem is not how to implement certain things, but to come to a conclusion all (maintainers) can live with. Perhaps things have changed since then and we can discuss this issue again. So I propose to do the following: - merge fp extensions into apache13-php3 - make the php3 part of apache13-php3 optional (apache13-php3 should be renamed to something reasonable then) - remove apache13, apache13-fp, apache13-modssl, apache13-php3 and apache13-ssl Alternatively we can integrate fp extensions into apache13-php3 and leave everthing else as it is. But I think this wouldn't help very much because it would be still confusing to have too many apache13-* ports. So what do you think? [Cc'ed to apache13* maintainers] -- Dirk Froemberg FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000108150504.B76402>