1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Apache HTTP Server 2.4, where art thou?

Discussion in 'Porting New Software' started by fggggg13432ew, Sep 2, 2012.

  1. fggggg13432ew

    fggggg13432ew New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    2012-04-17 <-- Apache 2.4 Apache HTTP Server was released as "stable" by the Apache foundation.
    2012-04-20 <-- It should've been available for FreeBSD in the ports tree.
    2012-09-02 <-- Today, almost FIVE MONTHS later, it is still not in the FreeBSD ports tree.

    I have been waiting, hoping, checking and pulling my hair daily for all these days. I've asked people, searched for any signs of life, subscribed to the mailing list, but nobody seems to care.

    It's a surreal experience. I would do it myself if I could, but I don't have the expertise. This is not laziness or whining. I simply have a set of skills different from this, and thus this is not "my task" in this world.

    Could somebody offer any hope for me? Is anyone working on this at all? Why does it take so incredibly long? 2.4 has massive improvements. And no, I'm not going to switch to nginx or anything else, and compiling source code is not an option.

    I'm going crazy over this.
     
  2. swills@

    swills@ New Member Developer

    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have you considered working on it and sending in a patch? We're well aware, but it is a volunteer project after all. Volunteer!
     
  3. fggggg13432ew

    fggggg13432ew New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know how to respond to this since I already addressed it in the first post.
     
  4. wblock@

    wblock@ Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator Developer

    Messages:
    11,252
    Likes Received:
    25
    You can wait for someone else to do it, do it yourself, or possibly even pay someone to do it. With the help of the existing port, the Porter's Handbook, and somewhat less than five months of time, it's possible to put together a preliminary port.

    Are there specific problems the new version fixes, or new features that are needed?
     
  5. fggggg13432ew

    fggggg13432ew New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Huge performance improvements, mostly. To compete with earlier mentioned competitors. Now it's really behind on FreeBSD.
     
  6. SirDice

    SirDice Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,423
    Likes Received:
    14
    I'm guessing the imminent release of 9.1 has put things on hold for a while. The ports tree is usually quite static around the time of a release.
     
  7. fggggg13432ew

    fggggg13432ew New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    It used to be 8.3 or something that blocked it... now it's yet another release... sigh. :(
     
  8. kpa

    kpa Member

    Messages:
    4,026
    Likes Received:
    13
    Unless someone has made a promise they are going to port apache 2.4 to FreeBSD there's no one in the world who has a responsibility to do so. The ports for FreeBSD are almost 100% volunteer based project. Step up yourself and start hacking ;)
     
  9. fggggg13432ew

    fggggg13432ew New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    For the billionth time: I don't have the necessary skills.

    And of course nobody is FORCED literally to do it. It should not be something that anyone needs to be forced or talked into. It should be NATURAL. Also, one might really wonder why there isn't some official "fallback maintenance team" for super important ports such as this one.
     
  10. kpa

    kpa Member

    Messages:
    4,026
    Likes Received:
    13
    In that case, keep asking. The freebsd-ports and freebsd-apache mailing lists should have at least some people that are capable and willing to do the porting. It's a matter of asking in a way that convinces those people that it's worth doing, just saying that it has to be done gets nowhere.
     
  11. adamk

    adamk New Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    Likes Received:
    0
    So who would decide what's a super important port? Personally, I could care less about apache 2.4.


    Adam
     
  12. baot

    baot New Member

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you the same guy that comes in ##FreeBSD every other day, demanding someone updates it?
     
  13. fggggg13432ew

    fggggg13432ew New Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you do care, then?
     
  14. adamk

    adamk New Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    Likes Received:
    0
    While I'm quite sure you realize I meant to say that I couldn't care less about apache 2.4, I would point out that saying I do care less about it doesn't actually mean I care about it in any significant manner :)

    For what it's worth, I'd rather see Xorg updated :)

    Adam
     
  15. SirDice

    SirDice Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,423
    Likes Received:
    14
    There's nothing wrong with Apache 2.2 and I doubt there will be many people that actually require the improved performance of 2.4. Sure, there will be people that will greatly benefit from it, but I think the vast majority of the current Apache users wouldn't notice any difference.

    Sometimes you just have to be a little patient.
     
  16. mix_room

    mix_room Member

    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    0
    While you say that you don't have the necessary skills, you don't say that you are unwilling to learn them. I am pretty certain that if you take the www/apache22 port as a basis, read the change-logs from apache2.2 to apache2.4 and apply them as necessary you will at least get partial results. Then you can share your work with other people, and you will see that someone will be willing to help you with the remaining portions.

    It is always a lot easier, and also a lot more fun, to help people who have tried to do things themselves first. Not only are you then teaching them something, but they also have a much greater appreciation for the amount of work that goes into doing something.

    Just give it a shot. Worst case - it doesn't work. For me it seems that the default instruction on http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/install.html work quite well for FreeBSD, ie it builds without obvious errors. This means that you are already quite close to having a working port.
     
  17. shitson

    shitson New Member

    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sure at one time in their lives everyone who has ever done anything, didn't have the experience they have now or needed at the time. 5 months is a long time to sit on your hands.
     
  18. D4rkSilver

    D4rkSilver New Member

    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    You might not have the skill to port it right now but nothing prevents you from learning.

    Also this is a user based forum so if you want help with updating a port I would recommend asking on the mailing lists.

    Peoples are generally nice there... When you know how to politely ask and not demand something. ;)
     
  19. NewGuy

    NewGuy New Member

    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the original poster needs Apache updated so badly that they are "going crazy" over it, then they should either learn how to port or offer a bounty for it. Expecting volunteers to make a minor update a priority just smacks of entitlement.
     
  20. AlexJ

    AlexJ New Member

    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    0
    @NewGuy
    Do you really think that http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/new_features_2_4.html is a "minor update" ?

    @Original_topic_starter
    Take a look at /usr/ports/www/apache22/files, there is a lot of important patches related to FreeBSD only that need to be applied to the new branch and to be make sure it works well before publish it. This is a new branch and old patches need to be review very carefully before applying it. Beside of that, take a look here http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/upgrading.html. Nobody want make experiments on users and ruin own business by teaching people(who tend to follow popular things(copy/paste from howto) and not really willing to learn anything new).
    There is some work on this branch, but until it proves itself as the production quality it wouldn't be published. Until it happened, you can just download source code and compile it.
    http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/install.html provide pretty straightforward instructions how to do it
    (
    You can avoid to install lynx by replacing downloading command to fetch. Well, all you need to do it is:
    Code:
    cd /path/to/directory/where/source/code/will/be/downloded 
    fetch http://www.reverse.net/pub/apache//httpd/httpd-2.4.3.tar.gz
    tar xvf ./httpd-2.4.3.tar.gz
    cd ./httpd-2.4.3
    mkdir -p -m 755 /usr/local/www/apache24    # directory where you want to keep compiled apache24 to avoid mess up with port's apache
    ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/www/apache24
    make
    make install # it will be installed to /usr/local/www/apache24
    ee /usr/local/www/apache24/conf/httpd.conf 
    /usr/local/www/apache24/bin/apachectl -k start
    
    ).
    As it already was stated here, at least on 8.3 you will be successful on this process.
    So you can get up and running apache24 in less then 20 minutes.
    It would be helpful if you will report any issues while using apache24.
     
  21. NewGuy

    NewGuy New Member

    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    0
  22. AlexJ

    AlexJ New Member

    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    0
    NO, I just thought that having access to generic expressions is a big step forward that can't be called as a "minor upgrade". It's a long awaited feature for those who need create conditional configurations. Just in case if you didn't see it yet :http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/expr.html

    Try to create apache's configuration where you need to restrict access by business hours, IP/netmask. In apache22 it is a real PITA. The only tools - regex to compare with "-ipmatch" binary operator in 2.4

    Human readable expressions like
    Code:
    <If "%{HTTP_HOST} == 'example.com'">
        Redirect permanent / http://www.example.com
    </If>
    
    to compare with

    Code:
    RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com$ [NC]
    RewriteRule ^(\/)?$ http://www.example.com [R=301,L]
    
    (Well, of course it questionable. For those who use it for a long time it would be preferable second solution, but our developers was really happy with first solution)

    Ability to use Lua for configuration and business logic IMHO also is a huge step forward. It would be much easy to create Lua script instead of writing own module.

    Ability to restrict allowed commands in .htaccess by AllowOverrideList

    Finally, it is now possible to Define variables in the HTTPD configuration.

    There's a lot of new, long awaiting features, so I was curious when you call this as "minor upgrade".
    Well, we all have different tasks, so dragon in my eyes is a fly in yours, so please do not take it as offense or sarcasm.
     
  23. mix_room

    mix_room Member

    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have you actually tried the official release. Seeing as it compiles fine for both me and AlexJ that should be a starting point for you.

    Once you have compiled it, package it into a port, and ask people to test it for you. If you do this you will be pushing your progress along a whole lot faster than by asking people to do the work for you.