apache2 & mod_log_config-st & mod_log_mysql

Yarema yds at CoolRat.org
Tue Jun 8 01:29:03 GMT 2004

--On Tuesday, June 08, 2004 00:36:45 +0200 Clement Laforet 
<clement at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 04:17:24 -0400
> Yarema <yds at CoolRat.org> wrote:
> Hi !
>> The docs list as one of the requirements to have a fixed apr_reslist.c
>> -- which is missing from the way you implemented the mod_log_mysql ->
>> mod_log_config-st -> apache2 ports dependencies.  Then there's the
>> whole issue of having mod_log_config-st in a separate port, itself
>> missing the modified mod_logio.c, which returns i/o counts as numbers
>> to mod_mod_log_config, not as strings as the original would do.
>> So here's what I propose.  How about dropping the mod_log_config-st
>> entirely and mod_log_mysql dependency on it.  And replacing the whole
>> mess with the four additional patches to the apache2 port that I'm
>> attaching with this email.  So far as I can tell this does not break
>> anything and does fix the two omissions mentioned above.  Not to
>> mention just being simpler IMHO.
> <snip>
>> Seems like the Right Thing (TM) to me. :)  What do you think?
> It should be :-)
> apr fix was planned to be include, but I have to admit I let it rot in
> my todolist.
> As you seem very concerned, I gonna explain you why I'll never include
> these patches in apache2 port >>directly<<.
> You surely noticed the amount of patches in files/ directory, and most
> of them focuses on build, not "add-ons". Since I've maintained this
> port, I mainly focus on its flexibility to make it looks like a big
> "(buggy) apache puzzle". All these efforts wasn't made in vain.
> First, I realized my dream, having an apache port that let you do
> everything you can do with configure (and perhaps more ;)). Secondly I
> wished to allow people making any kind of slave ports. My work was
> originally designed to make slave ports of metmux mpm and mod_perl2 as
> static module (this part is atm unfinished).
> Including patches which don't come from apache CVS don't delight me.
> It gives me more work ;-) (even if the major changes are done). For
> example, to update apache2 port I usually rework a part of autotools
> scripts, and run ~30 different builds. 3 more patches shouldn't be hard
> to maintain, but I prefer working on scripts to make all this little
> world live together, even if patches are 100% backward compatible.
> As far as I can, I try to keep "bonus functionnalities" out the port.
> You may think "OK lazy guy, that's nice, but it doesn't solve my
> problem".
> But I can solve it you know ;-) If you have a look at
> ${PORTSDIR}/www/apache2/Makefile.modules.3rd (which should become
> bsd.apache.mk) you can see you can change module name.
> So if this particular case, we can have a knob in apache2 port, let's
> say WITH_PATCHED_MODLOGCONFIG, which disconnects mod_log_config and
> mod_log_io from the build and add mod_log_config-st and future
> mod_log_io-st as RUN_DEPENDS ports, with the original names.
> Apache is a modular web server, we can do modular ports :)
> BTW, thank for your patch and your interest. I'm very happy to discuss
> about what I'm trying to do.
> clem

Clem,  thank you for your reply.  As a port maintainer of a rather 
monstrous port myself [mail/courier] I appreciate your position on this. 
Seeing how much excellent work you've put in to the apache2 port and its 
relations I would never think "OK lazy guy, that's nice, but it doesn't 
solve my problem".  My problem is solved by simply keeping the patches I 
sent you in my own ${FILESDIR}.  Just that in the spirit of sharing I did 
not wish to keep my solution to myself so I put it up for discussion. 
Perhaps you can just include the APR patch I sent in since that one does 
come from the apache cvs.  Then the only missing piece of the puzzle would 
be to have a mod_logio-st port.

Probably the Really Really Right Thing (TM) would be to have all these 
Sönke Tesch logging patches committed to the Apache2 CVS.  I don't know who 
in the Apache circles to bug about doing that.  I already forgot the name 
of the Apache commiter I was drinking with at the last NYCBUG meeting.  I 
guess that's what happens when tech talk is fueled by shots of vodka.  It's 
hard to remember the next day what you learned and who you learned it from. 
:)  But the question still stands -- how does one go about advocating that 
particular patches get included in the official Apache CVS repo?


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list