Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 3:36 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> but I'm not sure how to programmatically understand the coding style of a >>> given portfile. >> >> It's possible (we load and execute portfiles today). >> >> It would probably be easier if portfiles more

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:27 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > > On Mar 10, 2016, at 3:18 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> The general problem is something we should address. >>> >>> (a 'compatibility version' we store for ports and make part of the >>>

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 3:18 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> The general problem is something we should address. >> >> (a 'compatibility version' we store for ports and make part of the >> dependency engine? a better 'revbump a bunch of ports tool'? something else?) >> >> We

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:15 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:05 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> That's probably safe, but I don't think there is a compelling reason to try >>> and only revbump the minimal set of ports (better to have some

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:05 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> That's probably safe, but I don't think there is a compelling reason to try >> and only revbump the minimal set of ports (better to have some needless >> rebuilds/downloads of binary archives than to have mysteriously

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Rainer Müller wrote: >> On 2016-03-10 16:34, Ryan Schmidt wrote: The longer we wait, the harder it will be to catch these. Should we rev-bump all dependents of OpenSSL now? >>> >>> Those that haven't

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Rainer Müller wrote: > On 2016-03-10 16:34, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> The longer we wait, the harder it will be to catch these. >>> Should we rev-bump all dependents of OpenSSL now? >> >> Those that haven't already had their version or revision

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On 2016-03-10 16:34, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> The longer we wait, the harder it will be to catch these. >> Should we rev-bump all dependents of OpenSSL now? > > Those that haven't already had their version or revision increased since the > openssl update, yes, I would say. That is difficult to

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 10, 2016, at 09:14, Rainer Müller wrote: > >> On 2016-03-03 02:40, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> I consider it the responsibility of the committer who updated the >> openssl port to the version that changed its library ABI to revbump >> the ports that link with it,

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On 2016-03-03 02:40, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > I consider it the responsibility of the committer who updated the > openssl port to the version that changed its library ABI to revbump > the ports that link with it, regardless of maintainer status. It > should have been done at the same time that

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 3, 2016, at 7:29 PM, Marius Schamschula wrote: > I have not had any luck getting php-fpm to work with apache24-devel, though > it works nicely with nginx. I've been using php-fpm (compiled outside of macports) with apache 2.4 (compiled outside of macports) for

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

As a macports maintainer myself, as well as someone who is on the Apache httpd project itself, I volunteer to help out with this. -- Jim Jagielski Brief? Mobile > On Mar 3, 2016, at 7:29 PM, Marius Schamschula wrote: > > I agree that it’s time to do something about

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

I agree that it’s time to do something about apache. The ticket bellow is four years old, and I added myself to the CCs 21 months ago… As someone that has used apache 2.4.x since 2012 (my old hmug.org builds), and under MacPorts as apache24-devel for over two years (although I’m down to a

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 12:09 AM, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: >> On Mar 3, 2016, at 3:35 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> On Mar 3, 2016, at 00:18, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: >>> >>> Apache 2 rev-bumped, cf. r146274. >>> >>> On a side

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:42 AM, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: > I’m sure there’s a lot of people running Apache 2.2 whose systems (probably > highly customized configurations) would break if we did that without some > kind of transition, because it’d definitely be a

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: >> The approach I suggested wouldn’t change layout in any way. apache2 would be >> obsoleted and replaced by apache22, which would be the

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: > The approach I suggested wouldn’t change layout in any way. apache2 would be > obsoleted and replaced by apache22, which would be the exact same port as the > previous apache2. Parallel to that, apache24-devel would

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> >> On Mar 3, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: >> >> On Mar 3, 2016, at 3:05 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> On Mar 3, 2016, at 00:18, Juan Manuel Palacios

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2016, at 3:05 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> On Mar 3, 2016, at 00:18, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: >>> >>> Apache 2 rev-bumped, cf. r146274. >>> >>> On a side note,

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 3, 2016, at 3:05 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > On Mar 3, 2016, at 00:18, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: >> >> Apache 2 rev-bumped, cf. r146274. >> >> On a side note, and if I may in this same thread, do we have any policy for >> not moving the

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

Yeah, that I understand, we keep versioned ports for other packages too, e.g. mysql55, mysql56, mysql57, and other examples. And we don’t replace one with the other for a myriad of reasons. So we could deprecate the apache24-devel port and create apache24, maybe even also deprecating apache2

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 3, 2016, at 00:18, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: > > Apache 2 rev-bumped, cf. r146274. > > On a side note, and if I may in this same thread, do we have any policy for > not moving the Apache 2.4 port out of “dev”? Not too sure when it became the > recommended release

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

Done in: https://trac.macports.org/changeset/146276 https://trac.macports.org/changeset/146277 Regards, Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla) > On Mar 2, 2016, at 7:03 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote: > > All the mysql ports with the exception of mysql5 are revbumped by >

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

Apache 2 rev-bumped, cf. r146274. On a side note, and if I may in this same thread, do we have any policy for not moving the Apache 2.4 port out of “dev”? Not too sure when it became the recommended release series by the ASF, but it certainly isn’t dev any longer. > On Mar 2, 2016, at 10:38

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

True enough. I’ll at least take care of the Apache 2 port in a bit if no one beats me to it, and I’ll see what can be done for the MySQL ports. > On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:10 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > > On Mar 2, 2016, at 7:32 PM, Juan Manuel Palacios

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 2, 2016, at 7:32 PM, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: > >> On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:00 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> >> On Mar 2, 2016, at 14:10, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: >>> >>> Hey Ryan, >>> >>> The Apache 2 port is failing a

Re: Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

On Mar 2, 2016, at 14:10, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote: > > Hey Ryan, > > The Apache 2 port is failing a reload with the "Symbol not found: > _SSLv2_client_method” error (Referenced from: > /opt/local/apache2/modules/mod_ssl.so\n Expected in: >