On 2015/03/29 22:49, frantisek holop wrote: > and i have no beef with the chroot patch. > it is in fact a nice addition,
It's a little buggy (see "-p /") and needs the manpage changes. Perhaps when those are fixed maybe we could see if upstream might be interested in taking the diff. > but it is not part of nginx itself, and i think it's wrong to silently > add features to well known software in the ports, no matter how useful > the added functionality is. Adding a note to DESCR fixes "silently". > when nginx was part of base, it was expected that > it would receive all kinds of local patches. > but just as openbsd apache is not apache anymore, > this nginx is also not nginx anymore. It's quite a different situation, the old OpenBSD httpd was effectively forked from Apache long ago, this is just a relatively simple patch. If you're wanting something that behaves the same as an installation on Linux then building your own (on both sides) is the only way, there are so many build options... > i would like a vanilla, upstream nginx please in > the ports, just like there is apache2, postfix, etc. > i dont find that unreasonable. I (and no doubt others) would prefer it with the chroot patch...
