Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 10:27:25 -0600 (MDT) From: John-David Childs <jdc@denver.net> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Apache and Ports Policies in General Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970724102246.3168E-100000@milehigh.denver.net> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.970724092712.shaggy@houseofduck.dyn.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997, Joshua Fielden wrote: > While I do have to agree in theory with you, I went to Apache.org and > got 1.2.1, and it compiled "out-of-the-box." It seems from the web page > that they make a special point of listing FreeBSD as one of the > platforms that it does do this on. I wasn't aware that "compiling out of the box" would preclude a package from making the ports collection. Based upon many of the "I haven't read the FAQ/Handbook/archives/docs" questions posted to this (and most) lists, IMHO having the latest stable version in the "stable" ports tree makes sense (then we don't have to see "I've heard about Apache...where do I get it and how do I install it?" on the list :-) <big grin for the humor impaired> -- John-David Childs (JC612) @denver.net/Internet-Coach System Administrator Enterprise Internet Solutions & Network Engineer 901 E 17th Ave, Denver 80218 Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.95.970724102246.3168E-100000>