| 1 |
How about not breaking apache? I was a little beyond pissed when I had |
| 2 |
to sit there for 2 hours trying to figure out why my apache was broken, |
| 3 |
and who was going to get put on my list of being kicked in the junk. |
| 4 |
Just for some stupid config file changes. I find it very hard to believe |
| 5 |
you guys couldn't come up with a better way to do it. Even if that means |
| 6 |
doing evil stuff in one of the stages that isn't sandboxed. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
--Iggy |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
On Sat, 2005-04-09 at 15:59 +0200, Christian Parpart wrote: |
| 11 |
> Hi guys, |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> refering to [1] and [2] I must see, that we've been in testing phase for quite |
| 14 |
> a long time now. Our eclass' changes reflect only to masked and/or testing |
| 15 |
> ebuilds, though, marking stable ebuilds somewhat obsolete. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Although, apache httpd is bumping 2.0.54 very soon and our latest *stable* is |
| 18 |
> just 2.0.52-r1 (and yet obsolete in all aspects). |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Before bumping a new 2.0.54 release of apache2, I would like to catch all |
| 21 |
> problems we maybe have to fix right before going stable. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Though, ... |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> please test apache-2.0.53 and/or apache-1.3.33-r2 (including your favorite |
| 26 |
> apache modules) on your system(s) and please report any oddies you |
| 27 |
> experience. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Thanks in advance, |
| 30 |
> Christian Parpart. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> [1] http://packages.gentoo.org/ebuilds/?apache-2.0.53 |
| 33 |
> [2] http://packages.gentoo.org/ebuilds/?apache-1.3.33-r2 |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives