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 j3K7awiE025837 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 07:36:58 GMT Received: from [192.168.0.22] (pD9E75438.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.231.84.56]) by iai.speak-friend.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0E9E238001 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:37:02 +0200 (CEST) From: Christian Parpart Organization: Gentoo Linux Foundation To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated =?iso-8859-6?q?ebuilds=09back_into?= package.mask Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:36:38 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200504160656.43452@zippy.emcb.local> <200504192045.51436@zippy.emcb.local> <200504192251.24493.pauldv@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200504192251.24493.pauldv@gentoo.org> 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="nextPart2484934.8HkYveKohJ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200504200936.40347.trapni@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 2accdcfc-b868-44fe-a17a-4f07414eff3e X-Archives-Hash: 4cd5686e738f1261badbd898a7408a53 --nextPart2484934.8HkYveKohJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 19 April 2005 10:51 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > On Tuesday 19 April 2005 21:45, Elfyn McBratney wrote: > > APR and APU are stand-alone and independent of apache, so there is no > > need to p.mask those libs. > > They do not coexist with the old apache2 properly as apache2 includes it's > own version. As did subversion. AFAIK we can't have apr/apr-utils as standalone pkgs as long as we've=20 subversion or apache2 still embedding it, that's been the reason for=20 providing the ebuild patch for subversion (from the apache herd), too - I=20 remember. Just embedding them again is really a great lost of at least=20 maintainability, so at least do I feel. And yeah, I disagree to a move-back, too!! I'm most likely not to support t= his=20 in any kind, instead, I'd be willing in pushing p.mask'ed apache httpd 2.1= =20 into the tree, so, that I don't have to live with the old shitty behavior=20 again. Seriousely, why did we put all our power into those improvements when we're= =20 now about to revert mostly everything? Regards, Christian Parpart. =2D-=20 Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 09:29:00 up 27 days, 22:35, 0 users, load average: 0.01, 0.05, 0.00 --nextPart2484934.8HkYveKohJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCZgaIPpa2GmDVhK0RAiHTAJ4tI8vQMjUmx5q0+hL0vkx4l99vcwCeMeZ8 fVEvc8xkFz+wCICtn/UCaHA= =+xYK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2484934.8HkYveKohJ-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list