Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Jul 1997 13:57:51 -0600 (MDT)
From:      Joshua Fielden <shaggy@houseofduck.dyn.ml.org>
To:        John-David Childs <jdc@denver.net>
Cc:        "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: Apache and Ports Policies in General
Message-ID:  <XFMail.970724140740.shaggy@houseofduck.dyn.ml.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970724102246.3168E-100000@milehigh.denver.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As I said in the first sentence, I agree in theory, I was merely trying
to get you up and running if you hadn't thought of that. :-) I notice
there are a few ports that have this problem, yet you may or may not be
told until afterwards. If you install the gimp-0.99, it does not give
you any warnings, but a `pkg_info -a |grep gimp` gives you a line to
the effect of "if you want it to not crash, use the 0.99.9, 0.99.10."
It installs .10. This is after it's installed. :-) There are a few
others like this I can't recall off-hand, but it seems to be a
disturbing trend. At least with Netscape, my port tree has three and a
four beta. Neither is stable, but three's as stable as they're ever
going to release. :-) And I agree with making Apache as easy to find as
possible, as it's the "default" web server installed at setup time, and
is the most popular out there. And stable when you find it.

On 24-Jul-97 John-David Childs wrote:
>On Thu, 24 Jul 1997, Joshua Fielden wrote:
>
>> While I do have to agree in theory with you, I went to Apache.org
>and
>> got 1.2.1, and it compiled "out-of-the-box." It seems from the web
>page
>> that they make a special point of listing FreeBSD as one of the
>> platforms that it does do this on.
>
>I wasn't aware that "compiling out of the box" would preclude a
>package
>from making the ports collection.
>
>Based upon many of the "I haven't read the FAQ/Handbook/archives/docs"
>questions posted to this (and most) lists, IMHO having the latest
>stable
>version in the "stable" ports tree makes sense (then we don't have to
>see
>"I've heard about Apache...where do I get it and how do I install it?"
>on
>the list :-) <big grin for the humor impaired>
>--
>
>John-David Childs (JC612)       @denver.net/Internet-Coach
>System Administrator            Enterprise Internet Solutions
>  & Network Engineer            901 E 17th Ave, Denver 80218
>Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing.
>
>
>

-- Joshua Fielden, shag@concentric.net
SCSI is *not* magic. There are many technical 
reasons why it's occasionally nessicary to 
sacrifice a small goat to your SCSI chain.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.970724140740.shaggy>