On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Noel Butler <noel.but...@ausics.net> wrote: > > On 03/01/2017 23:11, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Back in the "old days" we used to provide complimentary builds > for some OSs... I'm not saying we go back and do that necessarily, > but maybe also providing easily consumable other formats when we > do a release, as a "service" to the community might make a lot > of sense. > > > 2 years ago it was decided to stop the official -deps (despite they are > included in dev still)... now you want to bring it back? (you'd have to if > you're going to roll usable binary packages or your "community service" > re-built packages are going to be broken)
I don't think he said that. For years httpd shipped the compiled current openssl, expat, pcre sources as a binary. There was no sources package of these, although we did provide the .diff to get the packages to build correctly. Because HTTP/2 requires OpenSSL 1.0.2, that will have to be part of most packages, including semi-modern Linux flavors. PCRE[2] is unavoidable, and while libxml2 can sub in for libexpat, the SVN project would rather we bound to libexpat for specific features they rely on. > Although I as many others here prefer to roll our own due to our configs, and > not having to deal with bloat, I can see this having a positive effect for > users of a couple of distros who when they release brand new releases, come > with antiquated junk thats outdated and stays outdated, to give those users a > choice of using a modern code set would be good, but requires long term > dedication. Agreed - it simply has to land somewhere like /opt/apache/httpd/ or whatnot, to disambiguate whatever the user builds for themself in /usr/local/ and what the OS might provision in /usr/
