From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from iai.speak-friend.de (iai.speak-friend.de [62.75.222.128]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j3AGhCgZ020078 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2005 16:43:12 GMT Received: from battousai.surakware.net (p3E9E0351.dip.t-dialin.net [62.158.3.81]) by iai.speak-friend.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7798A2383B7 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2005 18:43:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Christian Parpart Organization: Gentoo Linux Foundation To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/apache testing request (marking stable anytime soon) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 18:43:13 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200504091559.09967.trapni@gentoo.org> <1113144935.4536.2.camel@matrix.brianandsara.net> In-Reply-To: <1113144935.4536.2.camel@matrix.brianandsara.net> X-Face: $-3HTEy*5}2A{'R'VPim$,8KKX$l|:P^RhP{;yQ)g;]4isyohrOfk\)=?utf-8?q?Q=2Ep=23F3RWB=7D!m=24zn=0A=097=5CPUKBYRKDFUU=3A=5CZ+U=5Fa-/=5BhI?= =?utf-8?q?8DJZ?="WPC2j~}(N."(JB&VNb}kU&`> =?utf-8?q?9=3B=5FN=3BfnM=7BD=7B8=2EI+5=0A=09dg=60p=5EQ?=(:yE{eVgArPf190vEkbGis0vx];" =?utf-8?q?1O!L=7ByKN4J=5B4=27=7E=7Eh+o+=7D=2EgzkmqNs=60=7D=7C0uq8a=0A=09?= =?utf-8?q?=25WQg=3F=3D=25y7X74tMWEkL=5DQQ?=(_Yc"m*aC+HD%!,6/k>L7S%'<}_B2&cI}/W(p+;rJ%2`0A<) =?utf-8?q?F=0A=09P7P=2E=60=3Dy=7C=7DU=7E=3F!?= List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1592766.DkEZ5b0Xtl"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200504101843.15345.trapni@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 3d9dc69f-4f43-45d4-8ee5-4948667a0525 X-Archives-Hash: d229cfa1e29d35ae9879f21d0450e0e3 --nextPart1592766.DkEZ5b0Xtl Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday 10 April 2005 4:55 pm, Brian Jackson wrote: > How about not breaking apache?=20 We did not break apache, we broke *binary compatibility* within apache. Are you aware of *why* we decided to break binary compatibility? Well, if not, I can say we did so to provide LFS to the end-users. You might not need it, but for sure, others will be very happy about. So,=20 please before just asking this, also consider the benifits from it. Of course, we did not wanna push nearly-everyones little blindly executed=20 `emerge -uvD world` into hell. But everyone makes mistakes, so including me= =2E=20 sorry for that, though, we got almost every complain fixed already. That's= =20 why we're requesting for testing, for being sure, going stable won't shoot= =20 anyone into his foot again. =46inally, the eclass updates have been a BIG must to simplify maintaince i= n a=20 long term. So, we could of course have introduced just yet another eclass=20 resisting parallel to the old one - just to have worked around this breakag= e=20 as well. Yeah, we learn all the time :) > I was a little beyond pissed when I had=20 > to sit there for 2 hours trying to figure out why my apache was broken, > and who was going to get put on my list of being kicked in the junk. > Just for some stupid config file changes.=20 does it work now? when did you upgrade? what problems did you run in? pleas= e=20 feedback us. That's what we was calling for ;-) > I find it very hard to believe=20 > you guys couldn't come up with a better way to do it. Even if that means > doing evil stuff in one of the stages that isn't sandboxed. We thought about doing so but decided against. At least my reason was, beca= use=20 this would be a bloody hell and a no-go in a garrantied clean config merge. I advice everyone to configure their new apache files (httpd.conf for=20 commonapache/apache.conf) from scratch. Regards, Christian Parpart. =2D-=20 the following rfc contains how to quote on lists like this: Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 17:57:59 up 18 days, 7:04, 0 users, load average: 0.28, 0.31, 0.35 --nextPart1592766.DkEZ5b0Xtl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCWVejPpa2GmDVhK0RAn88AKCAvMMFiQlx9PuFKfhrnKo9BBffKACcDKIJ eGgqye/x1aVDjxOQIsgp8LM= =soE/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1592766.DkEZ5b0Xtl-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list