|
Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing |
| Summary: | apache2-event no longer requires apache2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [openSUSE] openSUSE Distribution | Reporter: | Georg Pfuetzenreuter <georg.pfuetzenreuter> |
| Component: | Apache | Assignee: | E-mail List <apache-bugs> |
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | E-mail List <qa-bugs> |
| Severity: | Normal | ||
| Priority: | P5 - None | CC: | david.anes, pgajdos |
| Version: | Leap 15.6 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | Other | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Found By: | --- | Services Priority: | |
| Business Priority: | Blocker: | --- | |
| Marketing QA Status: | --- | IT Deployment: | --- |
|
Description
Georg Pfuetzenreuter
2024-06-15 06:44:22 UTC
The original thought was, as far as I remember at least: 1. zypper in apache2 (or zypper in apache2 apache2-event if you don't want default prefork MPM) installs what you request for (sysconfig, ). 2. zypper in apache2-<MPM> is meant to be minimal and installs just the MPM with modules, nothing else. Unfortunately I haven't heard any feedback on this previously, perhaps you may find this misleading or not useful at all as the second possibility does not work out of the box and you need to provide (even minimal) configuration by something else (either in default location /etc/apache2/httpd.conf or any file specified by -f). The decision is of course on current apache2 maintainer (David), just wanted to express the reasoning, sorry for chiming in. Hi Petr, thanks for the explanation. I understand why a minimal httpd setup might be of interest. It was just rather unexpected as some of our tooling broke with the upgrade to 15.6 as there was no need to explicitly include "apache2" before. I think that at least the directory layout would be useful to have in the minimal setup and that maybe the package names should be more indicative if the separation missing the "Requires" is intended to be kept, given the standard expectation in openSUSE being that services installed by packages are startable "out of the box". I'm not sure what's the best option here. I like the idea from Petr, to have a very mininmal httpd install, but I also think Georg has a point. What I'm not sure is if we will break anything, as the multibuild has been around for quite some time. Maybe we can document this somewhere? Ideas? (In reply to David Anes from comment #4) > I'm not sure what's the best option here. I like the idea from Petr, to have > a very mininmal httpd install, but I also think Georg has a point. Sure, both will have pros and cons and I am completely fine with either way. |