Opened 9 years ago
Closed 6 years ago
#50965 closed enhancement (fixed)
Move apache24-devel to apache2
Reported by: | grigutis@… | Owned by: | ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt) |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | ports | Version: | |
Keywords: | Cc: | BjarneDMat, pixilla (Bradley Giesbrecht), Schamschula (Marius Schamschula), khepler, hostep (Pieter Hoste), dClauzel (Damien Clauzel), chrisminett (Chris Minett), hotsupport, alexwhitewhale (Alexander Romanovich), jimjag (Jim Jagielski), MacTrophy | |
Port: | apache24-devel apache2 |
Description
According to the Apache2 HOWTO, "the apache24-devel port will eventually replace the contents of the apache2 port at which time the apache24-devel port will be retired."
Since OS X has been using apache 2.4 for about a year and a half now (since 10.10 was released), would it be possible to start the process of making 2.4 the default for the apache2 port or moving apache24-devel out of development status?
I'm not sure how much work this involves though. According to the HOWTO, it sounds like a lot of other ports would have to be touched.
Change History (21)
comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)
Cc: | ryandesign@… removed |
---|---|
Owner: | changed from macports-tickets@… to ryandesign@… |
Port: | apache2 added |
Type: | request → enhancement |
Version: | 2.3.4 |
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by hostep (Pieter Hoste)
I'm looking for a way to run HTTP/2 on my local machine using Apache. Switching to Apache 2.4 with the mod_http2 module installed would accomplish this.
I work on projects which request a whole bunch (sometimes more then 50) small javascript files (only in developer mode of our projects), and switching to HTTP/2 would significantly improve the speed of our development setup.
So this another upvote to try to get Apache 2.4 replacing Apache 2.2 in Macports.
Thanks!
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by dClauzel (Damien Clauzel)
Cc: | Damien@… added |
---|
Cc Me!
Having apache 2.4 and php7 as default versions would be nice. It is time to move on.
comment:7 Changed 8 years ago by chrisminett (Chris Minett)
Cc: | chrisminett added |
---|
comment:8 Changed 8 years ago by MacTrophy
Cc: | MacTrophy added |
---|
comment:9 Changed 8 years ago by hotsupport
Cc: | hotsupport added |
---|
comment:10 Changed 7 years ago by alexwhitewhale (Alexander Romanovich)
Cc: | alexwhitewhale added |
---|
comment:11 Changed 7 years ago by jimjag (Jim Jagielski)
Cc: | jimjag added |
---|
comment:12 Changed 7 years ago by MacTrophy
Cc: | MacTrophy removed |
---|
comment:13 Changed 7 years ago by MacTrophy
Cc: | MacTrophy added |
---|
comment:14 follow-up: 15 Changed 7 years ago by Schamschula (Marius Schamschula)
I'm currently working on cleaning up apache.
I've marked the apache port (1.3.x) obsolete. I intend to do the same for apache20
The question is what to do about the current apache2:
a) rename it to apache22 b) rename it to apache-legacy c) mark it as obsolete
My current thought is option (a). That requires a bit of additional effort for apache modules, i.e variants supporting apache 2.2.x and 2.4.x.
comment:15 follow-up: 16 Changed 7 years ago by danielluke (Daniel J. Luke)
Replying to Schamschula:
a) rename it to apache22 My current thought is option (a). That requires a bit of additional effort for apache modules, i.e variants supporting apache 2.2.x and 2.4.x.
That's consistent with what we've done with other ports. We should focus on having the module ports work with 2.4 and optionally provide a 2.2 variant. I suspect that very few people actually need apache 2.2 instead of 2.4 at this point.
comment:16 Changed 7 years ago by Schamschula (Marius Schamschula)
Replying to danielluke:
Replying to Schamschula:
a) rename it to apache22 My current thought is option (a). That requires a bit of additional effort for apache modules, i.e variants supporting apache 2.2.x and 2.4.x.
That's consistent with what we've done with other ports. We should focus on having the module ports work with 2.4 and optionally provide a 2.2 variant. I suspect that very few people actually need apache 2.2 instead of 2.4 at this point.
That's what I'm currently working on. I've updated about half the modules to apache 2.4.x, and will add back apache22 variants based on the current version, where applicable. A number of modules are incompatible with apache24, and will be replaced by new ports, while others will go away entirely.
comment:17 follow-up: 21 Changed 7 years ago by Schamschula (Marius Schamschula)
Committed: [12fedbd20c5bd98b3dc91437384886d24ede3f52/macports-ports]
I'll leaving this ticket open in case something breaks.
comment:18 follow-up: 20 Changed 7 years ago by MacTrophy
Thank you for 2.4 !
Some notes that might help other users and/or package maintainers.
First keep in mind that the configuration formats for 2.4 have changed a lot since 2.2, especially with configurations like Deny
, Allow
, Satisfy
and Require
. https://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/upgrading.html helped us a lot 1-2 years ago when we moved our Debian servers from Apache 2.2 to 2.4.
The files seems to have been standardized in term of locations (at least for my installations)
Old -> New
/opt/local/apache2/bin/apachectl
-> /opt/local/sbin/apachectl
/opt/local/apache2/conf
-> /opt/local/etc/apache2
/opt/local/apache2/logs
-> /opt/local/var/log/apache2
I am not certain why it's this way but the PHP modules config files (5.6 and 7.0 at least) are now in /opt/local/etc/apache/extra
. I expected those in /opt/local/etc/apache2/extra
may be it's for backward/forward compatibility with other Apache versions?
The httpd daemon is running as (user and group) daemon:daemon
, I think it was www:www
If you enable ssl_module
you will probably also need socache_shmcb_module
.
The TLSv1 is NOT disabled by default. It's recommended disabled since the end of 2016 in the /opt/local/etc/apache2/extra/httpd-ssl.conf
. Consider adding -TLSv1
at the end of the lines
for SSLProtocol
and SSLProxyProtocol
.
The default configuration of /opt/local/etc/apache2/extra/httpd-userdir.conf
is not configured by default for OS X standards, you will need to change UserDir public_html
value to UserDir Sites
and <Directory "/home/*/public_html">
to <Directory "/Users/*/Sites">
.
comment:19 Changed 7 years ago by Schamschula (Marius Schamschula)
comment:20 Changed 7 years ago by Schamschula (Marius Schamschula)
Replying to MacTrophy:
Thank you for 2.4 !
Some notes that might help other users and/or package maintainers.
First keep in mind that the configuration formats for 2.4 have changed a lot since 2.2, especially with configurations like
Deny
,Allow
,Satisfy
andRequire
. https://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/upgrading.html helped us a lot 1-2 years ago when we moved our Debian servers from Apache 2.2 to 2.4.The files seems to have been standardized in term of locations (at least for my installations)
Old -> New
/opt/local/apache2/bin/apachectl
->/opt/local/sbin/apachectl
/opt/local/apache2/conf
->/opt/local/etc/apache2
/opt/local/apache2/logs
->/opt/local/var/log/apache2
I am not certain why it's this way but the PHP modules config files (5.6 and 7.0 at least) are now in
/opt/local/etc/apache/extra
. I expected those in/opt/local/etc/apache2/extra
may be it's for backward/forward compatibility with other Apache versions?
That was a typo. Fixed in [3668d218da11c67b03aa982bcabb1067a16ca563/macports-ports].
The httpd daemon is running as (user and group)
daemon:daemon
, I think it waswww:www
If you enable
ssl_module
you will probably also needsocache_shmcb_module
.The TLSv1 is NOT disabled by default. It's recommended disabled since the end of 2016 in the
/opt/local/etc/apache2/extra/httpd-ssl.conf
. Consider adding-TLSv1
at the end of the lines forSSLProtocol
andSSLProxyProtocol
.The default configuration of
/opt/local/etc/apache2/extra/httpd-userdir.conf
is not configured by default for OS X standards, you will need to changeUserDir public_html
value toUserDir Sites
and<Directory "/home/*/public_html">
to<Directory "/Users/*/Sites">
.
comment:21 Changed 6 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
Replying to Schamschula:
I'll leaving this ticket open in case something breaks.
Time to close this. If there are any problems, please open new tickets.
Note that a "request" ticket type is only for requesting a new port.