Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 06:10:45
Message-Id: 1113631832.10461.9.camel@mirage.ramereth.lan
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask by Elfyn McBratney
1 On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 06:56 +0100, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
3 > As I'm sure many of you will know, the updated apache and associated ebuilds
4 > (so-called apache refresh) have caused a number of problems since coming out
5 > of package.mask and going into testing. As a result, we have a number of
6 > packages that simply do not function with the updated apache ebuilds,
7 > rendering testing (on the apache side of things) broken.
9 Yes, this has gotten very annoying.
11 [snip]
13 > A number of people have suggested putting these updated ebuilds back into
14 > package.mask, or lessening the impact of the upgrade from current stable
15 > apache to the new ~arch apache. So, I would like to solicit advice from the
16 > developer community as to how we can rectify this.
17 >
18 > The way I see it, we have three options:
19 > - package.mask (downgrades for those early adopters)
20 > - keep the same layout (/etc/apache2/conf, etc.) and wait until 2.2 is out to
21 > change it
22 > - have the newer apache ebuilds migrate from old-style to new-style config
23 > (very hard to do, but possible)
25 I say at the very least package.mask it. Testing is supposed to be able
26 to compile and work, not half work and test. There's a reason we have a
27 package.mask, please use it! To me, it makes more sense to push these
28 changes in the next major release of apache (2.1/2.2). 2.0.x should be
29 kept as is since a lot of people are using that now and any change
30 midway through the release would cause a lot of havoc.
32 So far, most of the changes don't seem to be backward compatible with
33 each other. Right now you can't make a module that will work for either
34 variation of the layout without hacking it badly. To me, thats bad
35 especially since the new layout isn't in package.mask.
37 I just fear if we continue to push these changes on the current 2.0.x
38 line will continue to piss off a lot of people.
40 Cheers,
42 --
43 Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
44 Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager
46 ---
47 Public GPG key: <>
48 Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742
50 ramereth/


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature