Re: [gentoo-dev] subversion ebuild

[Mark Gordon]

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:25:13 +0200
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote:

> On Friday 25 April 2003 14:26, Jani Monoses wrote:
> > I'm replying to a digest mail so this won't be in the thread
> >
> > Paul have you thought of building svn without apache support?
> > The latest version 0.22 due to be out in a couple of days will have
> > a config option for building without DAV and only with local and
> > ra_svn access.This would make it a lot simpler for people who only
> > want to manage their local repos or are fine with ra_svn and don't
> > want the overhead of apache configuration and the dependency on
> > neon. Maybe a new USE flag (apache) would be needed too?
> > This way it could be stable independent of apache.
> > A lot of people use svn with only ra_svn or local and are content
> > with it that way.
> > I am using it with bdb 4.0.14 already in portage so I second that
> > there's no need to build that too.
> > BTW APR is in portage (although only 0.9.2 and not 0.9.3 which is
> > needed by svn)
> > Anyway it's great that there's some activity with the svn
> > ebuild since it was over a year old now.
> >
>
> I'm happy to hear that it builds.

It's now built on both of my ~x86 boxes. I'll try to do some playing
with it over the weekend.

> I will look into using the apache2 use flag,

That would be useful. My stable box does not have Apache 2, so I will
test this configuration once you've done it.

> and I will look at the status of db4.0.14 which at the
> moment is still masked.

My initial vote would be to unmask db 4. Having it installed on my
machines has not broken anything and it is slotted. I've just installed
it on my Stable box as well without problem.
-- 
Mark Gordon
Paid to be a Geek & a Senior Software Developer
Currently looking for a new job commutable from Slough, Berks, U.K.
Although my email address says spamtrap, it is real and I read it.

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list