On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:22:08 +0200 Matthias F. Brandstetter wrote:

> ---------- quoting Bjorn Sodergren ----------
> > I would rather see apache 2.0 ebuild renamed to apache2 , so if we
> > wanted to use apache 2.0 we could, than make a mistake like this.
> >
> > Emerge apache2 instead of just apache
> 
> I second that! Wouldn't it be possible to make an extra ebuild 
> "apache2" for that? Or with a USE flag, like its now (is it so now?)?
> 
> Greetings, Matthias

The apache2 USE flag is IIRC only for selecting *optional* apache-2
support for apache modules that support both versions, not for selecting
the apache version to install. I wouldn't like a package split for the
two versions because then we could split every package that has two
incompatible versions (openssl, mysql, gtk to name a few), but because
we have SLOTs we don't need to do that (I recognize that apache is a
difficult case, but if we start we son't know where it ends).

I don't see any real reason to split the package or stay with apache-1
as default as nobody is forced to upgrade. You can even do an "emerge
-uD world" without upgrading if you mask apache-2 in
/etc/portage/package.mask, as long as all the relevant modules support
apache-1 and I haven't seen a statement that this will be dropped.

Marius

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Reply via email to