From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ghislain Hachey To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: IPFire Building Packages Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2014 17:50:49 +0800 Message-ID: <53BA6D79.2070900@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1404724962.19419.19.camel@rice-oxley.tremer.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0216252215077449606==" List-Id: --===============0216252215077449606== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 7/7/14, 17:22, Michael Tremer wrote: > Are you sure that subversion needs apr at runtime? It certainly needs > the library, but I think that everything that is needed by subversion at > runtime should be in the core system already. > > We had a subversion package which was dropped in 2008, because the > IPFire project switched to git and there was no one who wanted to > maintain subversion any more. > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=3Dipfire-2.x.git;a=3Dcommitdiff;h=3Da91ca65e82da80= 139f0e0675def755561ec7d478 > >> >Long story, but I'm curious about why apache makes used of bundled third >> >party sources here, is this a special case that requires to go against >> >what's encouraged? > APR is a part of apache. Some distributions simply create a subpackage > for apr as it is usually not needed at runtime, just for development. > OK, that all makes sense. So I might as well just point the subversion=20 ./configure script to use the ones in httpd sources for the build and be=20 done with it. I don't mind maintaining the package (and other orphan=20 packages that I may want to use from time to time). What does this=20 usually entail? Just following the upstream project for bug and security=20 fixes and re-building new sources when that happens? =20 -- GH --===============0216252215077449606==--