From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 10 16:14:34 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C177B106566C for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:14:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@my.gd) Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com [209.85.212.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564C08FC13 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:14:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhr1 with SMTP id hr1so5518538wib.13 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:14:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.20.39 with SMTP id k7mr4336859wie.6.1326212073174; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:14:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfleuriot-at-hi-media.com ([83.167.62.196]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fo18sm83927036wbb.12.2012.01.10.08.14.31 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:14:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F0C63E6.6020604@my.gd> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:14:30 +0100 From: Damien Fleuriot User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alejandro Imass References: <4F0C0E3D.7010906@nagual.nl> <4F0C4BF6.6030401@my.gd> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD9 + PHP X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:14:34 -0000 On 1/10/12 4:34 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Damien Fleuriot wrote: >> >> > > [...] > >> >> Mine is, as I pointed out in my earlier reply to Dick, that people who >> don't even *use* apache shouldn't get stuck with a *useless apache >> module* just because they installed PHP. >> >> >> A possible alternative that would keep everyone happy would be *another* >> package that actually includes the module, like for example a package >> called "mod_php5", it would install the stuff from php5 + the apache module. > > Could be, something like mod_perl, but contrary from Perl, PHP is not > very useful without Apache anyway. > > And who are you to claim that "php is not very useful w/o apache anyway" ? I mean, just because it falls within your needs doesn't mean it's a good option for everyone. In the same way, I could claim that rsyslogd should replace syslogd in the base system because I find it better, so everyone should use it. We use PHP here in a production environment on many servers that have never seen, and will never ever see, apache. On some it runs daemons, on some it runs scripts, on yet some others it's served by either nginx or lighttpd, not to mention dedicated fastcgi servers that don't have a web server running to begin with. IMO the best option would be a separate package, enforcing an apache module on people that will never ever use it is just plain dumb. This also seems to be the opinion of the port's manager, seeing mod_php is unselected by default. Just my 2 cents.