Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:29:01 -0400 From: Yarema <yds@CoolRat.org> To: Clement Laforet <clement@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: apache2 & mod_log_config-st & mod_log_mysql Message-ID: <23AF610AD82BA6360776D096@volyn.coolrat.org> In-Reply-To: <20040608003645.5630da22.clement@FreeBSD.org> References: <61670F38EE92BEC06E2BE009@volyn.coolrat.org> <20040608003645.5630da22.clement@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On Tuesday, June 08, 2004 00:36:45 +0200 Clement Laforet=20
<clement@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 04:17:24 -0400
> Yarema <yds@CoolRat.org> wrote:
> Hi !
>
>> The docs list as one of the requirements to have a fixed apr_reslist.c
>> -- which is missing from the way you implemented the mod_log_mysql ->
>> mod_log_config-st -> apache2 ports dependencies. Then there's the
>> whole issue of having mod_log_config-st in a separate port, itself
>> missing the modified mod_logio.c, which returns i/o counts as numbers
>> to mod_mod_log_config, not as strings as the original would do.
>> So here's what I propose. How about dropping the mod_log_config-st
>> entirely and mod_log_mysql dependency on it. And replacing the whole
>> mess with the four additional patches to the apache2 port that I'm
>> attaching with this email. So far as I can tell this does not break
>> anything and does fix the two omissions mentioned above. Not to
>> mention just being simpler IMHO.
> <snip>
>> Seems like the Right Thing (TM) to me. :) What do you think?
>
> It should be :-)
> apr fix was planned to be include, but I have to admit I let it rot in
> my todolist.
> As you seem very concerned, I gonna explain you why I'll never include
> these patches in apache2 port >>directly<<.
> You surely noticed the amount of patches in files/ directory, and most
> of them focuses on build, not "add-ons". Since I've maintained this
> port, I mainly focus on its flexibility to make it looks like a big
> "(buggy) apache puzzle". All these efforts wasn't made in vain.
> First, I realized my dream, having an apache port that let you do
> everything you can do with configure (and perhaps more ;)). Secondly I
> wished to allow people making any kind of slave ports. My work was
> originally designed to make slave ports of metmux mpm and mod_perl2 as
> static module (this part is atm unfinished).
> Including patches which don't come from apache CVS don't delight me.
> It gives me more work ;-) (even if the major changes are done). For
> example, to update apache2 port I usually rework a part of autotools
> scripts, and run ~30 different builds. 3 more patches shouldn't be hard
> to maintain, but I prefer working on scripts to make all this little
> world live together, even if patches are 100% backward compatible.
> As far as I can, I try to keep "bonus functionnalities" out the port.
>
> You may think "OK lazy guy, that's nice, but it doesn't solve my
> problem".
> But I can solve it you know ;-) If you have a look at
> ${PORTSDIR}/www/apache2/Makefile.modules.3rd (which should become
> bsd.apache.mk) you can see you can change module name.
> So if this particular case, we can have a knob in apache2 port, let's
> say WITH_PATCHED_MODLOGCONFIG, which disconnects mod_log_config and
> mod_log_io from the build and add mod_log_config-st and future
> mod_log_io-st as RUN_DEPENDS ports, with the original names.
>
> Apache is a modular web server, we can do modular ports :)
>
> BTW, thank for your patch and your interest. I'm very happy to discuss
> about what I'm trying to do.
>
> clem
Clem, thank you for your reply. As a port maintainer of a rather=20
monstrous port myself [mail/courier] I appreciate your position on this.=20
Seeing how much excellent work you've put in to the apache2 port and its=20
relations I would never think "OK lazy guy, that's nice, but it doesn't=20
solve my problem". My problem is solved by simply keeping the patches I=20
sent you in my own ${FILESDIR}. Just that in the spirit of sharing I did=20
not wish to keep my solution to myself so I put it up for discussion.=20
Perhaps you can just include the APR patch I sent in since that one does=20
come from the apache cvs. Then the only missing piece of the puzzle would=20
be to have a mod_logio-st port.
Probably the Really Really Right Thing (TM) would be to have all these=20
S=F6nke Tesch logging patches committed to the Apache2 CVS. I don't know =
who=20
in the Apache circles to bug about doing that. I already forgot the name=20
of the Apache commiter I was drinking with at the last NYCBUG meeting. I=20
guess that's what happens when tech talk is fueled by shots of vodka. It's =
hard to remember the next day what you learned and who you learned it from. =
:) But the question still stands -- how does one go about advocating that=20
particular patches get included in the official Apache CVS repo?
--=20
Yarema
http://yds.CoolRat.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?23AF610AD82BA6360776D096>