Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news From: Ken Bigelow <kbigelow@www.play-hookey.com> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Apache and FreeBSD versions Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 08:32:57 +0000 Organization: Erol's Internet Services Lines: 52 Message-ID: <32BCF239.683B@www.play-hookey.com> References: <E2FwC0.4yy@nonexistent.com> <E2MKzC.Ks7@nonexistent.com> Reply-To: kbigelow@www.play-hookey.com NNTP-Posting-Host: kenjb05.play-hookey.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:32979 Louis Epstein wrote: > > Louis Epstein (le@put.com) wrote: > : Recent discussions of Apache and FreeBSD vs. Netscape etc. made me look > : in /usr/ports/distfiles to see what version of Apache I had,I installed > : it when I just got my FreeBSD 2.1 running and haven't looked since. > : > : I have 1.0.0. > : > : Some time ago I copied a new Ports Collection onto my HD,which specifies > : version 1.0.5,but I don't know if trying to install this would work,as > : the file's likely not there any more...just like the link on the FreeBSD > : Release Information Page(which still says the 2.1.6 release "will > : probably occur in the next 2-3 months") announcement for 2.0 Alpha > : gives a supposed link from which one could FTP FreeBSD 2.0A which of > : course doesn't work! > : > : The current Ports Collection entry is apparently for 1.1.1. > : > : The version they are now hawking at www.apache.org is 1.2b2. > > This is now the one in the Ports Collection as of 12/17. > > : I'm wondering what I may gain by upgrading Apache,AND if doing > : it before or after an upgrade of FreeBSD 2.1 to 2.1.6 would make > : a difference...or what difference in performance might be attributable > : to each change if I did both. > : > : I understand the previous discussion said 2.2,but not 2.1.6, > : had been tweaked to run WWW faster,but in an ISP operation > : environment stability's the key...I suppose that,with reference to the > : mentioned caching program,Squid 1.0.22 would be a better bet than > : 1.1.0. My priority is also stability. I'm running Apache 1.1.1 on FreeBSD 2.1R with no problems. I will leave it this way for the present, to retain that stability. I won't be upgrading to either 2.1.5 or 2.1.6 on the server machine, with 2.2R just around the corner. As soon as I know 2.2 is truly stable, I expect to upgrade to that platform, but I can't see changing the platform every couple of months under my circumstances. For the same reason, I won't run the beta version of Apache. When they're past the beta stage and have no little latent bugs surfacing after releasing the next flavor of Apache, I'll look at upgrading that. Fortunately, changing back to the older version of Apache is far less of a problem than changing back to the older version of FreeBSD! -- Ken Are you interested in | byte-sized education | http://www.play-hookey.com over the Internet? |