On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Graham Leggett <[email protected]> wrote: > On 29 Nov 2011, at 02:37, Jeff Trawick wrote: > >> FWIW >> >> * a normal build defaults to event >> * a multi-MPM build of 2.4 "should" build the MPMs as DSOs > > +1. > > This is what I'm trying to nail down - to get the packaging to work against > the ideal installation of httpd. > > What I am also keen to do is identify modules that bind to external > libraries, and spin them out into dedicated RPMs like we always did with > mod_ssl, the idea being that an installation of the basic server shouldn't > bring in any onerous dependencies on a system.
cool/thanks! (butting out now) > >> Is the RPM design supposed to be aligned with anything else outside of >> httpd 2.4? Is there some external tooling that expects MPMs to be >> built as with 2.2? Also, I presume that the build flavor shouldn't >> change within 2.4.x? > > Originally we adopted the Redhat RPM spec file to make it easy for people to > drop the ASF provided RPM onto a system and have it work reasonably closely > to the original system, but our packaging has moved ahead of Redhat's at this > point (to my knowledge, anyway). > > I hope that other vendors will pick up our packaging as the "canonical" way, > and improve the way httpd is deployed out there. > > Regards, > Graham > -- > > -- Born in Roswell... married an alien...
