From owner-freebsd-apache@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 9 23:36:42 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apache@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D2337B9; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 23:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from apnoea.adamw.org (apnoea.adamw.org [204.109.59.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 095A4A0B; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 23:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.192.25] (dhcp-108-170-169-12.cable.user.start.ca [108.170.169.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by apnoea.adamw.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C756F114B81; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 19:36:37 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: apache 2.2 ports From: Adam Weinberger In-Reply-To: <540F829C.10301@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 19:36:35 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <8DF8037F-F9EC-488D-86C4-0923789C174C@adamw.org> <8c7c200293f6d84e756d6eec4a1edcc2@mail.feld.me> <1078D71E80C9283D7F23513F@ogg.in.absolight.net> <540F7CFB.4050304@gmx.de> <540F829C.10301@gmx.de> To: olli hauer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Cc: Mathieu Arnold , Baptiste Daroussin , apache@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-apache@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Support of apache-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 23:36:42 -0000 On 9 Sep, 2014, at 18:43, olli hauer wrote: > On 2014-09-10 00:22, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> +--On 10 septembre 2014 00:19:39 +0200 olli hauer = wrote: >> | On 2014-09-08 15:51, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >> |>=20 >> |>=20 >> |> +--On 8 septembre 2014 13:41:54 +0000 Mark Felder = >> |> wrote: >> |> | September 6 2014 10:24 AM, "Adam Weinberger" = wrote:=20 >> |> |> apache team - >> |> |>=20 >> |> |> So it seems that setting USE_APACHE=3D22 doesn=92t actually = depend on >> |> |> apache-2.2. This means that every USE_APACHE=3D22 port is = broken, and as >> |> |> of right now won=92t have any 10.1 packages. >> |> |>=20 >> |> |> I=92m happy to go through and add "DEFAULT_VERSIONS=3D = APACHE=3D22=94 to >> |> |> this ports, but I wanted to check with you guys first. Is that = the >> |> |> right way to fix it? Is there something else that can be done = to make >> |> |> USE_APACHE=3D22 actually depend on apache-2.2? >> |> |>=20 >> |> |=20 >> |> | FYI I had to solve this problem today with the following two = make.conf >> |> | options: >> |> |=20 >> |> | DEFAULT_VERSIONS=3D apache=3D2.2 =20 >> |> |=20 >> |> | (note it's 2.2, not 22 -- bsd.default-versions.mk shows a period = should >> |> | be used) >> |> |=20 >> |> | APACHE_PORT=3D www/apache22 >> |> |=20 >> |> |=20 >> |> | Previously I only had the DEFAULT_VERSIONS entry and it worked = fine. >> |> | Suddenly I needed to add APACHE_PORT as well. This is with an up = to >> |> | date ports tree -- my packages build automatically every 8 = hours. >> |>=20 >> |> Yes, bapt sent a patch to fix that >> |> >> |=20 >> |=20 >> | Based on the patch from bapt, I finished a new one (some cases = where >> | missing) >> | = https://people.freebsd.org/~ohauer/diffs/apache/bsd.apache.mk_20140909.di >> | ff >> |=20 >> | Perhaps someone wants to test and/or review before I commit this = fix >> | tomorrow. >>=20 >> Using our code review tool to post this patch would have been nice, = easier >> to comment on, and to look at, too :-) >>=20 >> >=20 > Here you go: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D750 Hi Olli, With the old patch in place, there were a few build runs that took place = that showed some interesting effects. One that I don=92t think gets = resolved (and I=92m not sure that it really can be) is that packages for = a lot of 2.2-dependent ports will be unavailable. If they depend only on apache-2.2, no problem. But if they depend on ex. = mod_something, and the mod_something package is built with the = apache-2.4 default, then there will be a conflict when it tries to build = the new port. Really the python team is the only group to actually work around the = concurrency problem, but their solution is complex and cumbersome to = adapt to another system. It would be really nice if that concurrency = system could be extracted and used as an API for other subsystems. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org