Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Stuart Herbert <stuart@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: 'Chris Bainbridge' <C.J.Bainbridge@×××××.uk>, gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: RE: [gentoo-dev] HEADS UP: Twitching to un-arch-mask Apache2
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 12:22:47
Message-Id: 000801c33982$13ade100$c500a8c0@Churchill
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] HEADS UP: Twitching to un-arch-mask Apache2 by Chris Bainbridge
1 Hi Chris,
3 > I don't think software updates should be held back because
4 > people might still
5 > be using old versions. You can fix your apache1 installation
6 > now, and all of
7 > the software you currently have installed will continue to
8 > work. You just
9 > won't be able to use new packages that require apache2.
11 You're making the assumption that ebuilds for packages that support apache1
12 continue to support apache1 in the future. If, say, the mod_php ebuild
13 drops support for apache1, then that forces mod_php users to upgrade to
14 apache2. It'll happen eventually, sure. It seems reasonable enough to ask
15 whether the gentoo devs have a plan to do this sooner tho ;-)
17 > On Monday 23 June 2003 11:11, Stuart Herbert wrote:
18 > >
19 > > PHP is still not recommended for production use with Apache 2
20 > > (
21 >
22 > <shrug>. AFAIK gentoo isn't recommended for production use either.
24 Not my issue. The nice thing about Gentoo is that it's a
25 "meta-distribution"; it allows us to build servers up out of software that
26 we - as the responsible sys admins - are prepared to use in production.
27 Personally, I'm happy continuing to use apache1 for now, but am not ready to
28 move to apache2. I'm not trying to stop anyone else from using apache2
29 (like I could anyway!). I'm just interested in understanding what the
30 future is for apache1 support on Gentoo.
32 > is
33 > "keeping up
34 > > with the Jones's" really that important?
35 >
36 > Yes, actually it is. One of the compelling reasons for my switch from
37 > debian/redhat to gentoo was that the packages are more
38 > up-to-date.
40 Same here.
42 But "packages up to date" isn't the same as "default choice = what other
43 distros do".
45 > Whats the
46 > point in wasting effort backporting bug fixes when there are
47 > new releases?
49 Who's backporting bugfixes where? I don't see how making apache2 the
50 default web server has anything to do with any issues around backporting
51 bugfixes.
53 > If
54 > you need this kind of "fixed point release" software then
55 > gentoo, with its
56 > constant upgrade cycle, probably isn't the best distro for you.
58 Thank you for the advice, but I'll decide what's the best distro to run on
59 my servers, thank you very much. The reason I like Gentoo is that, I
60 feel, it offers a far wider choice than the other distros.
62 I'm not asking for "fixed point releases". You've misunderstood me. All
63 I'm asking is whether mods will continue to build for apache1 for the
64 future. Not just apache1, but important "value added" packages like mod_php
65 and mod_authmysql.
67 > You can't hold back progress. Having said that, all of your
68 > existing software
69 > will continue to work as long as you choose not to upgrade
70 > it. With gentoo,
71 > its your choice.
73 I'm not trying to hold back progress. I'm just trying to understand what
74 the apache1 position will be going forward. What's wrong with that? Do you
75 feel threatened somehow by the idea that there's someone out there who isn't
76 enthusiastic about running apache2 yet? Why the strong (and negative)
77 reaction to practical questions?
79 Thanks for the feedback Chris, but please - next time read what I've said
80 before hitting that reply button.
82 Best regards,
83 Stu
84 --
88 --
89 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] HEADS UP: Twitching to un-arch-mask Apache2 Chris Bainbridge <C.J.Bainbridge@×××××.uk>