Hi, On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Arno Töll <a...@debian.org> wrote: > tags 666834 + patch > thanks > > Hi Thibaut, > > you will find attached below a patch porting your module to Apache2 2.4. > Please test it and consider its inclusion. Note, I hardly tried more > than compiling and loading the module. I didn't test it in detail. > > I've also fixed two problems while driving-by: You missed a > build-dependency against dpkg-dev >> 1.16.1 (that's the fist version to > support --export=configure) and a build-dependency against libapr1-dev. > > The patch includes upstream changes, too. Given you are upstream you > might judge yourself whether it's suitable to you. Besides I consider > the whole patch mostly a proof of concept.
As I told you in my previous email which you quote just below, I had /already/ done the necessary upstream source changes. I'm sorry you wasted your time on this and I thank you for suggesting packaging changes anyway. >> Pretty sure I saw a debian wiki page or other debian page stating that >> 2.4 wasn't due for Wheezy, but it seems I can't find it anymore. Last >> minute transition seems like added fun. > > Well, it's not exactly last minute. We announced the transition in March > already [1]. March 22 was like yesterday, apache-2.4 didn't get any extensive in-archive testing by virtue of not having hit unstable even yet, and I understand that Wheezy is to be released "tomorrow". Unless that tomorrow turns out to be in a year, I guess that's pretty much a last minute change. Not that I care that much anyway, I've got a fairly strong impression of the "modifications" in Debian's overall quality and I'm adjusting to it, as far as I'm concerned :-P >> Practical question: how am I supposed to upload a package that can be >> built either against 2.2 or 2.4 now that you have removed the >> apache2-dev package from 2.4? I've modified my source to build against >> 2.4 and it also supports (from the same source, 1.3 (yes!), 2.0 and >> 2.2). > > I guess you meant vice versa, we dropped apache2-dev from the 2.2 > package (which was a virtual package in 2.2). I am not sure whether > there is a way to support both, a 2.2 module and a 2.4 module from the > same source package. There are quite orthogonal changes regarding binary > package dependencies and maintainer scripts. I guess one could figure > something, but at least from our side no further support is approached. > At least from our side we do not plan to support more than one major web > server in Debian at the same time. > > If you can or want to make sure the binary dependencies end up right > (apache2.2-bin for 2.2 packages, apache2-api-20120211 for 2.4 packages; > a2enmod/a2dismod for 2.2 maintainer script, maintscript-helper for 2.4 > packages), it would possible to support both. Likewise for > build-dependencies, but note Debian buildds do not resolve alternative > build-dependencies in the form a | b. My point was merely making my life and/or backports' life (and/or debian-based distros') easier by providing a package that, when built against either 2.4 (wheezy, as it seems) or 2.2 (squeeze) would not require any modification. It seems it won't be possible, as the package as per your own patch won't be buildable in squeeze and as building against apache-2.2 and apache-2.4 require conflicting build-deps (which is a departure from the previous 2.0 to 2.2 transition, iirc); well, so be it. I'll upload a new package when 2.4 hits unstable. T-Bone PS: CCing (instead of BCCing) cont...@debian.org is annoying when your recipient hits "reply all". -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
