Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build - Slackware

This is a discussion on Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build - Slackware ; notbob wrote: > On 2008-06-08, Bob McConnell wrote: >> MySQL is published under a dual license. For personal use, you can use it >> under the GPL. For commercial use, you need to have the Enterprise >> edition....... > > ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

  1. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    notbob wrote:
    > On 2008-06-08, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >> MySQL is published under a dual license. For personal use, you can use it
    >> under the GPL. For commercial use, you need to have the Enterprise
    >> edition.......

    >
    > I'm no db guru and am only just learning mysql/php, but didn't Sun just
    > acquire mysql and isn't the whole GPL licensing thing up in the air for
    > commercial users under their new ownership? Quite frankly, I'm wondering if
    > I shouldn't shift my efforts to postgresql. I certainly have no resources
    > for using big buck licensed software.
    >
    > nb


    This is what I read and a bit less tedious than the previously posted link
    http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/ci_9349234


  2. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-08, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >
    > MySQL is published under a dual license. For personal use, you can use it
    > under the GPL.


    The terms of the GPL dictate that you can not restrict use in this
    manner. Thus, anyone is free to use MySQL under the terms of the GPL,
    no matter if you're George Honky running your personal web site or
    SuperMegaAwesomelyRichCorp running some commerce site.

    Look at it this way: anyone is free to redistribute MySQL Community
    under the terms of the GPL. So a commercial entity could simply obtain
    it from other redistributors, if MySQL were so unwise as to try to
    restrict commercial use to paid licensees.

    The difference between the two versions is a choice: you can choose to
    use the GPL as your license to use MySQL, and therefore abide by those
    terms (e.g., you can't distribute your own program that uses MySQL code
    without releasing your own code), or you can choose to buy a license
    that allows you to do whatever that license wants. But it's your
    choice, not MySQL's (or, now, Sun's, which does concern me a little).

    > For commercial use, you need to have the Enterprise edition.


    Untrue, see above. You can choose to have the Enterprise edition, but
    you don't need it unless you redistribute. Not everyone who uses MySQL
    needs to redistribute.

    > I never said I was looking for a package for
    > personal use. Nor did I suggest that it was not available under those
    > conditions if you were. Perhaps you need to take off the blinders.


    I don't believe so. Perhaps you are thinking of redistribution, but
    you've only said "use" in your posts.

    --keith


    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  3. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-08, goarilla <"kevinpaulus|"@|skynet <> wrote:
    >
    > just curious what are the obvious reasons to choose MySQL above
    > Postgres ?


    Just for full disclosure, I use both MySQL and Postgres. Using MySQL
    with MyISAM tables is easy to backup, but it's only recent versions of
    MySQL that support things like views and transactions, if you need
    those. I've never actually measured performance between MySQL and
    Postgres, but my personal opinion is that it's more or less a religious
    war, like vi vs. emacs.

    (There is one interesting difference, which is that the meta-database
    commands are actually built into MySQL's dialect of SQL, whereas they
    are part of the psql client in Postgres. What this means is, for
    example, you can use "SHOW TABLES" as a query in programs you write
    that connect to a MySQL database, but you can't use "\dt" in a
    program that connects to a Postgres database. (Actually, this might be
    old info, but I think it does still apply.))

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  4. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-09, microsys wrote:

    > This is what I read and a bit less tedious than the previously posted link
    > http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/ci_9349234


    I apparently missed Sun's about face on slashdot. Here's a short history of
    events I ran across over the last few months and the reason for my concern.
    Note the "Sun to Begin Close Sourcing MySQL" headline:

    http://doggdot.us/?search_term=mysql

    nb

  5. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 2008-06-09, Keith Keller wrote:
    >> For commercial use, you need to have the Enterprise edition.

    >
    > Untrue, see above. You can choose to have the Enterprise edition, but
    > you don't need it unless you redistribute. Not everyone who uses MySQL
    > needs to redistribute.


    That should read "unless you redistibute under terms other than the
    GPL." Say a commercial entity wants to embed MySQL into an app they
    are writing for instance.

    In any event, the grand-parent was wrong in what he said, but perhaps
    not in what he meant. Postgres being under a BSD license, isn't
    hampered in this way.

    - --
    It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
    Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
    Ecclesiastes 7:5
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkhNhAoACgkQrZS6hX/gvjp6pgCghn9SvyFKT3F24fCSHq4hDZO2
    Oi8AoOSQi4RjUeoe26devg0XR+0NDUO4
    =p/7Q
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  6. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:30:09 -0700, Keith Keller wrote:

    > On 2008-06-08, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >>
    >> MySQL is published under a dual license. For personal use, you can use
    >> it under the GPL.

    >
    > The terms of the GPL dictate that you can not restrict use in this manner.
    > Thus, anyone is free to use MySQL under the terms of the GPL, no matter
    > if you're George Honky running your personal web site or
    > SuperMegaAwesomelyRichCorp running some commerce site.
    >
    > Look at it this way: anyone is free to redistribute MySQL Community under
    > the terms of the GPL. So a commercial entity could simply obtain it from
    > other redistributors, if MySQL were so unwise as to try to restrict
    > commercial use to paid licensees.
    >
    > The difference between the two versions is a choice: you can choose to use
    > the GPL as your license to use MySQL, and therefore abide by those terms
    > (e.g., you can't distribute your own program that uses MySQL code without
    > releasing your own code), or you can choose to buy a license that allows
    > you to do whatever that license wants. But it's your choice, not MySQL's
    > (or, now, Sun's, which does concern me a little).
    >
    >> For commercial use, you need to have the Enterprise edition.

    >
    > Untrue, see above. You can choose to have the Enterprise edition, but you
    > don't need it unless you redistribute. Not everyone who uses MySQL needs
    > to redistribute.
    >
    >> I never said I was looking for a package for personal use. Nor did I
    >> suggest that it was not available under those conditions if you were.
    >> Perhaps you need to take off the blinders.

    >
    > I don't believe so. Perhaps you are thinking of redistribution, but
    > you've only said "use" in your posts.
    >
    > --keith


    Let me try to clear one thing up. We were working on two projects where
    each would have put servers in more than 500 restaurants in different
    chains. Since the servers would be owned by the restaurants, I'm pretty
    sure that would have been defined as distributing the product.

    Now, when I say use, I mean to use it to learn enough to become part of
    that product team, which is what I have been directed to do. As a result,
    I would have to "use" the version they are supporting. If it were MySQL,
    that means the Enterprise version. Do I make myself clear?

    Bob McConnell
    N2SPP


  7. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:12:00 +1000, Res wrote:

    > On Sun, 8 Jun 2008, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >
    >> I don't recall ever seeing a usable help message in a ./configure. Most
    >> of them simply detail each and every option independantly without any

    >
    > WTF? now I know your a troll
    > even the most basic of *nix users knows that if you want to compile
    > somthing with particular support, you look at configures options you could
    > even do the lazy ass way of using-
    >
    > cd /usr/local/src/php-5.2.6
    > ./configure --help | grep -i post
    >
    > ....now the output shows -
    >
    > --with-pdo-pgsql[=DIR] PDO: PostgreSQL support. DIR is the PostgreSQL
    > base --with-pgsql[=DIR] Include PostgreSQL support. DIR is the
    > PostgreSQL


    But where does it tell me the sequence to compile which parts of pgsql,
    PHP and Apache? Where is the information to explain the difference between
    static and dynamic link/load? What other libraries will need to be
    installed to get it all to run?

    In short, where is the dependency chart?


    > be gone fool, go back to win****.


    I haven't used MS-Windows seriously since I found
    Soft Landing Systems. Unfortunately, Slackware was the only package that
    comes close the the ease of use they had. So I have been stuck with it
    ever since. At work we use RHEL for production and FC for development. I
    won't even attempt to do package updates on them.

    Maybe it is time to retire.

    Bob McConnell
    N2SPP


  8. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-10, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >
    > Let me try to clear one thing up. We were working on two projects where
    > each would have put servers in more than 500 restaurants in different
    > chains. Since the servers would be owned by the restaurants, I'm pretty
    > sure that would have been defined as distributing the product.


    Yes. Of course, this is the first time you're mentioning
    redistribution.

    > Now, when I say use, I mean to use it to learn enough to become part of
    > that product team, which is what I have been directed to do. As a result,
    > I would have to "use" the version they are supporting. If it were MySQL,
    > that means the Enterprise version. Do I make myself clear?


    Finally, yes. But as I mentioned, someone already up on the
    redistribution issues should use the terms use and redistribute
    properly; in particular, even though you're only using the software, the
    final intent is to redistribute, so you should say that in your postings
    claiming that MySQL is not free for you to use. Otherwise you risk
    setting off the thread that you in fact did set off (and risk being
    called a troll by people less patient or tolerant).

    It'd be easy to fix: state your first paragraph up front, instead of
    waiting X posts to do so. Then it'll be clear that you need to
    redistribute and that MySQL Community may not be an option. (I say "may
    not" because you or your organization does have the option of
    redistributing your own code to these restaurants under the GPL; if you
    choose not to, then you're choosing to eliminate MySQL Community. Some
    people might see this as splitting hairs: "there's no way my company
    will GPL its code!", but many of us said that about Netscape, right?
    So it's only the scenario of redistributing code that you choose not to
    place under the GPL that eliminates MySQL Community as an option.)

    To get back on-topic, did you actually get Postgres and Apache and PHP
    built the way you want it?

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  9. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, Bob McConnell wrote:

    > Let me try to clear one thing up. We were working on two projects where
    > each would have put servers in more than 500 restaurants in different
    > chains. Since the servers would be owned by the restaurants, I'm pretty
    > sure that would have been defined as distributing the product.


    You could get away with using the community version, legally. I think you
    guys should have consulted a lawyer, or at least MyQL folks.
    Why - think of teh hundreds of thousands of independant IT contractors out
    there who have setup a local server with someone, 98% would be in LAMP,
    MySQL knows this and is not going to go after 100K people and the 100K
    businesses. Again if in doubt, consult lawyers, who can converse with
    MySQL (Suns) lawyers.

    --
    Cheers
    Res

    I read usenet and lists in pine. But m$ outlook, thunderbird and gmail
    often use html span/whatever for quotes, makes it hard to tell who said
    what, so I dont try. If I ignore you, thats why! Use a compliant mailer.

  10. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, Bob McConnell wrote:

    > But where does it tell me the sequence to compile which parts of pgsql,
    > PHP and Apache? Where is the information to explain the difference between
    > static and dynamic link/load? What other libraries will need to be
    > installed to get it all to run?


    If you compiled pgsql support into PHP, then went to apache.org, it
    is full of pgsql examples, since 2.x natively supported pgsql long before
    mysql because of licening issues (resolved as at 2.2.8)
    I've just noted even the configure scripts help does not reflect the
    --with-mysql option that is now used... I'll try make sure thats fixed
    before 2.2.9, which is getting close

    If there is any deps, that will be in your pgsql source or package ehader.
    > Soft Landing Systems. Unfortunately, Slackware was the only package that
    > comes close the the ease of use they had. So I have been stuck with it
    > ever since. At work we use RHEL for production and FC for development. I
    > won't even attempt to do package updates on them.


    The fact you use FC is totally scary, we used to use RHEL, but its higher
    maintenance then Slackware, because RH screw with and butcher so many of
    their programs, one only has to look at the updates repo for RHEL and
    Slackware to know whats most sane, and Fedora is even worse, we use to run
    a mirror for FC, and typcially within one week of a release there is close
    to a half a gig worth of updates, in fact one version there was over 1 gig
    in updates in a week from its release, Slackware never ever ever has had
    those issues because Pat keeps the packagers as the vendor intended, and
    doesnt hack out code or distro-ise the code in what goes into Slackware
    unlike RH and Debian etc...

    > Maybe it is time to retire.


    I know that feeling, but i'm only in my 40's, and I'd go stir crazy with
    boredom if I did.


    --
    Cheers
    Res

    I read usenet and lists in pine. But m$ outlook, thunderbird and gmail
    often use html span/whatever for quotes, makes it hard to tell who said
    what, so I dont try. If I ignore you, thats why! Use a compliant mailer.

  11. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-10, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >
    > But where does it tell me the sequence to compile which parts of pgsql,
    > PHP and Apache?


    Postgres is first, then PHP with postgres support, then Apache with
    PHP support. (I don't recall if you can build in Postgres support
    directly into Apache; I suspect this would be a mod_perl thing, which
    doesn't apply in your case.) Running ./configure would help, since it
    would show you the --with- options; Apache will have a --with-php option
    (or something like that) and PHP has a --with-pgsql (or similar).

    > In short, where is the dependency chart?


    The sysadmin is in charge of the dependency chart.

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  12. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-10, Keith Keller wrote:
    > On 2008-06-10, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >>
    >> But where does it tell me the sequence to compile which parts of pgsql,
    >> PHP and Apache?

    >
    > Postgres is first, then PHP with postgres support, then Apache with
    > PHP support. (I don't recall if you can build in Postgres support
    > directly into Apache; I suspect this would be a mod_perl thing, which
    > doesn't apply in your case.) Running ./configure would help, since it
    > would show you the --with- options; Apache will have a --with-php option
    > (or something like that) and PHP has a --with-pgsql (or similar).
    >


    I thought PHP would not compile properly without apache install first. PHP
    needs the apache install first...right

    ken

  13. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, No_One wrote:

    >
    > On 2008-06-10, Keith Keller wrote:
    >> On 2008-06-10, Bob McConnell wrote:
    >>>
    >>> But where does it tell me the sequence to compile which parts of pgsql,
    >>> PHP and Apache?

    >>
    >> Postgres is first, then PHP with postgres support, then Apache with
    >> PHP support. (I don't recall if you can build in Postgres support
    >> directly into Apache; I suspect this would be a mod_perl thing, which
    >> doesn't apply in your case.) Running ./configure would help, since it
    >> would show you the --with- options; Apache will have a --with-php option
    >> (or something like that) and PHP has a --with-pgsql (or similar).
    >>

    >
    > I thought PHP would not compile properly without apache install first. PHP
    > needs the apache install first...right


    You are correct as php needs to know where apxs2 is


    --
    Cheers
    Res

    I read usenet and lists in pine. But m$ outlook, thunderbird and gmail
    often use html span/whatever for quotes, makes it hard to tell who said
    what, so I dont try. If I ignore you, thats why! Use a compliant mailer.

  14. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    On 2008-06-11, No_One wrote:
    >
    > I thought PHP would not compile properly without apache install first. PHP
    > needs the apache install first...right


    Well, actually, it depends.

    For Apache 1.3 with static modules (the way I have always done it), PHP
    is first. But for 1.3 with shared httpd modules, and apparently for all
    Apache 2.0 installs, apache comes first.

    But don't take my word for it:

    http://www.php.net/manual/en/install.php

    (In any case, Postgres will always come before PHP or Apache.)

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  15. Re: Slackware 12.1 installs wrong Apache build

    goarilla wrote:
    > just curious what are the obvious reasons to choose MySQL above
    > Postgres ?


    Nobody does anymore, they're all switching to sqlite, which - sadly -
    isn't part of slackware.

    Martin


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2