Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Aug 2003 12:59:30 -0700
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Sergey Matveychuk <sem@ciam.ru>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: Apache dependence
Message-ID:  <20030818195930.GB73409@rot13.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <3F40CC65.1000204@ciam.ru>
References:  <3F4037B9.1010604@ciam.ru> <20030818051533.GA70270@rot13.obsecurity.org> <3F40CC65.1000204@ciam.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--Y7xTucakfITjPcLV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 04:53:57PM +0400, Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 06:19:37AM +0400, Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
> >
> >>How people decide the problem with ports depended on Apache?
> >>It is known there is a few apache ports, how to decide what port to=20
> >>depend on?
> >
> >
> >See http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3Dports/32604
> >The patch needs to be updated to use APACHE_PORT instead.
>=20
> But how is it works? Where APACHE_PORT is set? There is no such variable=
=20
> in Mk/bsd.*.mk.
> I've seen no patch where you point.

The PR proposes to use AP_PORT to hold the category/portname of the
default apache port to use.  As discussed in the audit trail of the
PR, the variable should be named APACHE_PORT instead.

Kris

--Y7xTucakfITjPcLV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/QTAiWry0BWjoQKURAsv+AKD8JjNdLcRh9UktqnfzEEIK39mNUACgtBMZ
sw/2YcivUNkZV5weuJPYMy0=
=kf0V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Y7xTucakfITjPcLV--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030818195930.GB73409>