On Tue, Jul 10, 2007, Christoph Schug wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 22, 2007, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> >
> > > Just a heads up: we recently investigated a lot into the packaging of
> > > Apache 2.2 in OpenPKG-CURRENT. Now it seems to be time to _finally_
> > > switch the "apache" package from Apache 1.3 to Apache 2.2. The
> > > "apache2-xxx" packages will become "apache-xxx", too. Once I've got APR
> > > cleaned up and extended today and Apache 2.2 building just fine again
> > > against the external "apr" package, I'll do the migrations.
> >
> > OpenPKG-CURRENT is now finally upgraded. When you upgrade your
> > instances, please notice that manual intervention is required as
> > mod_php and mod_perl are now in their own packages "apache-php" and
> > "apache-perl". So, previously you installed a PHP/Perl-aware Apache
> > with e.g. "openpkg builld -D with_mod_php -D with_mod_php_xml -D
> > with_mod_perl apache | sh" while now you have to use "openpkg builld-D
> > apache-php::with_xml apache apache-php apache-perl | sh".
>
> If been playing around with the new apache packages lately. Here's my
> list of annotations :-)
>
> Apache's default config references several snakeoil SSL certs which
> aren't supplied by the package leaving Apache in an unusable state.
> As there doesn't seem to be a helpful script at hand like mod_ssl's
> mkcert.sh there a several routes to go. The obvious is to "steal"
> mkcert.sh from mod_ssl and incorporate it into the apache package. OTOH
> there might be other packages which could benefit from a general purpose
> (dummy) cert facility as well. As openssl is part of the bootstrap might
> it be a better idea to provide such a facility as part of the openpkg
> package?
I don't think this really has to be provided already by the boostrap
("openpkg") package. But a dedicated "openpkg-x509" package might
be more than just reasonable. All packages which require an X.509
certificate should use this to generate one -- both snake-oil,
self-signed and real ones, of course.
> Next topic: apache-php. I haven't played with every single option but
> there's one I found a little bit curious in the spec file. As I haven't
> any application which makes use of that specific functionality I want
> to raise the issue here on the list. apache-php provides an option
> called 'with_imap_annotate'. It's unclear to me whether this in an
> independent option or it's just a variant of 'with_imap'. For me, it
> looks more like the second case, but I might be wrong. If not, there
> should be some fiddling in the "fixing implicit extension dependencies
> and correlations" section, right?
Perhaps this is from the Kolab changes? Thomas?
> [...]
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
OpenPKG http://openpkg.org
Developer Communication List openpkg-dev@openpkg.org
