From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 10 16:17:05 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 842E8106566B for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:17:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@my.gd) Received: from mail-ww0-f50.google.com (mail-ww0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5018FC0A for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:17:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgbdr11 with SMTP id dr11so3117547wgb.31 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:17:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.85.4 with SMTP id d4mr35617901wiz.0.1326212223975; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:17:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfleuriot-at-hi-media.com ([83.167.62.196]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 28sm83948608wby.3.2012.01.10.08.17.02 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:17:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F0C647D.9080206@my.gd> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:17:01 +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: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <4F0C0EBC.3010401@nagual.nl> <4F0C4B71.8060606@my.gd> <4F0C60D1.6010604@nagual.nl> In-Reply-To: <4F0C60D1.6010604@nagual.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 16:17:05 -0000 On 1/10/12 5:01 PM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: > Op 10-1-2012 15:30, Damien Fleuriot schreef: >> >> On 1/10/12 11:11 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: >>> Op 9-1-2012 21:06, Chuck Swiger schreef: >>>> On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:02 PM, alexus wrote: >>>>> there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports? >>>> The PHP maintainer decides the default options, which is what the >>>> precompiled package you got used. While many people want PHP in the >>>> form of an Apache module, other folks use it via fastcgi and so >>>> forth... >>> Yes that might be so. But it's far better to *have* this module and >>> disable it in Apache than not have it at all and for that reason only >>> *buiild* apache from ports in stead of using a package. >>> >> Yeah, no thank you. >> >> What about those people that don't even *use* apache and want to install >> PHP ? >> >> We get stuck with a useless module ? >> >> Really, *no thank you* > Wow, that really IS bad.. considering the price of drivespace.. No it > really is much better to *force* everyone who wants to run apache/PHP to > *build* from source. No pkgadd for those guys.. > It's not about disk space, it's about the philosophy behind it. Following the same line of thinking, the CGI binary should also be included, along with spawn-fcgi, php-fpm and so on. A separate package would be ideal, it'd be the same as php5 but would also include the apache module.