> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Stefan Fritsch <s...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > This sucks. In hindsight, maybe the mime.types change should have been > > deferred until we ugrade to apache 2.4 and people have to adjust their > > configs anyway. But I think it's too late now to go back. And leaving the > > *.php.foo problem there for yet another release cycle would not have been a > > good solution either.
Le Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:38:10PM +0200, Ondřej Surý a écrit : > > Just one last question which came to my mind. Would this all be fixed > if we added non-magic type to mime-support (e.g. > http://bugs.debian.org/670945) and reverting the changes done in the > php5-cgi package? > > That I think would justify change in the mime-support package. Too > much breakage on every front now. Hello Ondřej, Stefan, and everybody, Do you think that there is a way to fix #589384 (the *.php.foo problem) without removing the application/x-httpd-* media types ? I did not realise before that in the current release cycle, Apache stays at version 2.2 and that in Jessie, configurations will need to be re-adjusted anyway. I think that it is a good argument for a compromise, provided that #589384 stays solved and that we agree that in Jessie the media types application/x-httpd-* will be removed from /etc/mime.types. Of course, it is even better if there is an easy way to adjust the priority of the SetHandler statement of php5_cgi.conf in a way that does not break FastCGI configurations. What do you think ? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
