httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Pearson <e...@adaptations.com>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] possible FAQ: are Windows binaries for httpd no longer released?
Date Fri, 17 Jan 2014 17:12:57 GMT
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com>wrote:
>
>>  I've seen this question asked many times and I've never seen a
>> definitive answer to the actual question being asked. When were Windows
>> binaries discontinued from apache.org?
>>
>
> When the single person who prepared them stopped doing so...
>

With hats duly raised, and a deep bow to the volunteers of Apache, it is
remarkable that an entire platform can hinge on a single person! (But,
relax, see below -- there are several activate binary distributions for
windows that even includes 2.4.)

Tangentially:

I was going to wryly comment that it is no wonder that the web server share
of Apache httpd has been deeply cut over the last couple of years by MS IIS
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/01/03/january-2014-web-server-survey.html
.

But then I noticed that this trend, as seen in the chart "Web server
developers: Market share of all sites", is not true for the following
charts of active and busiest sites, where Apache httpd share is falling,
but not dramatically, and not due to IIS, but to the rise of nginx and
other web servers.

Interesting -- does this this represent a recent push (perhaps due to MS's
cloud efforts) in IIS distributions for services that are just plain not
being used?


>
> There is a necessary lack of definitiveness surrounding the past, present,
> and future availability of binaries from apache.org because their
> possible presence is up to the whims of individual contributors.  By policy
> the group has never formally released binaries and is in no position to
> ensure their availability.  (No mechanisms exist to review, test, and
> approve them -- we can only formally release source).
>

Just for the record, it is probably worth pointing out that the docs
themselves list some popular windows binary packages:

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/platform/windows.html

Erik.


>
> The FAQ is misleading; I'll try to improve it soon.
>
>
>>
>> EJP
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* vancaho [mailto:vancaho@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 16 January 2014 12:44 PM
>> *To:* users@httpd.apache.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [users@httpd] possible FAQ: are Windows binaries for
>> httpd no longer released?
>>
>>  There are release binaries for Windows, see
>> http://www.apachelounge.com/download/, or you can compile from the
>> source codes yourself.
>>
>>
>> 2014/1/16 Claude Morin <klodefactor@gmail.com>
>>
>>>   Please note that this is not a complaint.  It's more a check of my
>>> sanity and a hope to be pointed in the right direction :-).
>>>
>>> I'm unable to find Windows binaries for 2.2.26; only 2.2.25 is available
>>> at apache.org and on all mirrors.  I searched the FAQ and the mailing
>>> list archive and the only relevant thing I found is (emphasis mine):
>>>
>>> Q. Why isn't there a binary for my platform?
>>> A. ...The sole exception to these practices is the Windows package.
>>> Unlike most Unix and Unix-like platforms,
>>> Windows systems do not come with a bundled software development
>>> environment, so we do prepare binary kits for
>>> Windows when we make a release. Again, however, it's a voluntary thing
>>> and only a limited number of the developers
>>> have the capability to build the InstallShield package, so the *Windows
>>> release may lag somewhat *behind the source
>>> release. This *lag should be no more than a few days at most*.
>>>
>>> On a related note, I also noticed that no Windows binary exists for the
>>> 2.4 branch, not even an old version.
>>>
>>> Taken together, these findings make me think that Windows binary
>>> releases may have ceased formally some time after the release of 2.2.25.
>>>
>>> If that's correct, can anyone point me to information about the specific
>>> configuration settings and build environment used for the 2.2.25 release?
>>> If I'm to build from source, I'd like to replicate the build as accurately
>>> as possible.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for any clarity.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Born in Roswell... married an alien...
> http://emptyhammock.com/
>



-- 
Erik Pearson
Adaptations
;; web form and function

Mime
View raw message