Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Virgin Apache is Hard to Find

Posted by michael on from the yow dept.

markcox writes "Apache Week had written an article examining the Apache packages distributed by 10 popuplar Linux vendors. The survey found that all the vendors added some patches to virgin Apache including build patches, backported security patches, changing the product name through to dubious patches, and missed security fixes."

13 of 49 comments (clear)

  1. It's actually very easy to find... by embo · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the apache site:

    http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/

  2. Did anyone else's mind go to the gutter... by AngryPuppy · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...when they read about trying to find virgin Apache? Perhaps headlines like this are part of the reason the tribes don't like native American references on sports teams, products, etc.

    1. Re:Did anyone else's mind go to the gutter... by AngryPuppy · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, just yours. :-)

      That's what I was afraid of.

      :-)

  3. "virgin" httpd set up easier with ApacheToolbox by ubiquitin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The strangness that various distros impart to apache is why I usually start with Apache Toolbox. This uses wget to automatically download any missing source, and currently supports 60+ third party modules in addition to the 36 apache modules which are included in standard source distribution. For redhatters, this even halts appropriately for RPMs that cause problems. Works on slowaris, and pretty much any BSD/*NIX with gcc. I'm not a member of this project or anything, just a fan: it just works.

    --
    http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
  4. Maybe they should try slashdot... by tweder · · Score: 4, Funny

    It shouldn't be too difficult to find plenty of virgins around here :)

    *rimshot*

  5. big suprise... by josepha48 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    NOT!

    NetBSD's ports patches most software as there are a few things that are specific to NetBSD. Just do a make install and watch it say 'patching...'. Minor things like LD_LIBRARY_PATH and things that if configure is not set up for then it wont find (not sure what their patches do). FreeBSD does the same thing. RedHat can't ship a default kernel they have to ship their own kernel. So what's the point? In order for any vendor to ship apache or any other software they usually have patches applied. This is because the way apache is setup to do things and the way that the vendors setup things is different. To get update and things you have to pretty much wait till they are ready to update the software.

    Solution: You want a virgin apache, download the source from apache.org and compile and install yourself. Pass configure the options you want. It's really not that hard.... Is this really worthy news?

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!

  6. In other news... by mdielmann · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...Virgin Apache developers are fairly easy to find...

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  7. I just compile from the source by rklrkl · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apache is one of those programs that I actually refuse to use a binary distribution of. I just download the latest source, set my preferred options (making sure I build with dynamically loadable modules, which allows me to comment out the ones I don't need in httpd.conf) and away I go. If Apache is installed, I "rpm -e" it and then "make install" my source-built version. If I want to upgrade, usually only the httpd binary and modules need updating and then a quick restart of the server and I'm nicely up-to-date (would you trust "rpm -Uvh" on a live production server's Apache ??!).

  8. Slackware's Apache is not modified. by volkerdi · · Score: 4, Informative

    And that's the policy for nearly all of the other included packages as well.

  9. SWEET ZOMBIE JESUS!!! PATCHES??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The survey found that all the vendors added some patches to virgin Apache ["a patchy server"] including build patches, backported security patches, changing the product name through to dubious patches, and missed security fixes."

    Patches in Apache??? No way! You must be kidding me! I think I'm gonna wet my gay panties! Who'd've thought 'bout that?! This has to be a front page story on Slashdot!!!

  10. open source by charmer · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From the article: "The Apache Software Foundation would rather that vendors of Apache didn't add any third-party modifications to Apache at all - it adds to brand confusion. It's rather like going to buy Coke, complaining to the Coca-Cola company that the drink was too sour, then finding that your supermarket was adding lemon."

    Thats because Coke is not open source. Isn't the ability to modify an inherent feature in open source software ?

    Charmer

    1. Re:open source by jericho4.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      True, but the Apache team does have a valid concern, in that people who think they're getting vanilla Apache are getting something else.

      I think a good compromise would be every dist including comprehensive changlogs.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  11. Slashdot discovers... by augustz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    that distributions are doing precisely what open source software was designed to permit.

    Shock is expressed that all users of apache do not bow down to the demands of pencil pansies everywhere but that a free flowing and open marketplace of ideas expressed in different software variations exists.

    In good news however, software users can find software that doesn't have many variations or 'dubious patches' at their local Office Depot in boxes produced by Microsoft.

    Give me a break. This is news how?