httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William A Rowe Jr <>
Subject Re: The Version Bump fallacy [Was Re: Post 2.4.25]
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2017 06:02:15 GMT
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Noel Butler <> wrote:
> On 03/01/2017 23:11, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Back in the "old days" we used to provide complimentary builds
> for some OSs... I'm not saying we go back and do that necessarily,
> but maybe also providing easily consumable other formats when we
> do a release, as a "service" to the community might make a lot
> of sense.
> 2 years ago it was decided to stop the official -deps (despite they are included in dev
still)... now you want to bring it back? (you'd have to if you're going to roll usable binary
packages or your "community service" re-built packages are going to be broken)

I don't think he said that. For years httpd shipped the compiled
current openssl, expat, pcre sources as a binary. There was no sources
package of these, although we did provide the .diff to get the
packages to build correctly.

Because HTTP/2 requires OpenSSL 1.0.2, that will have to be part of
most packages, including semi-modern Linux flavors.

PCRE[2] is unavoidable, and while libxml2 can sub in for libexpat, the
SVN project would rather we bound to libexpat for specific features
they rely on.

> Although I as many others here prefer to roll our own due to our configs, and not having
to deal with bloat, I can see this having a positive effect for users of a couple of distros
who when they release brand new releases, come with antiquated junk thats outdated and stays
outdated, to give those users a choice of using a modern code set would be good, but requires
long term dedication.

Agreed - it simply has to land somewhere like /opt/apache/httpd/ or
whatnot, to disambiguate whatever the user builds for themself in
/usr/local/ and what the OS might provision in /usr/

View raw message