Re: Nginx Installation on Unix systems

Hi Jacob Thanks for the great work so far! I've not had time to properly inspect the patch content (I'll try and do so later today), but please can you ensure that related files are submitted in the same patch? As it stands your changes are in two patches, which means they cannot be tied together in a single commit. Thanks, Chris On 16 January 2014 00:49, Jacob Clark <iamjacobclark@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Are there any further improvements or suggestions from the mailing list that > I can make to this contribution? > > If not could I request my patch is reviewed and possibly committed? > > Jacob Clark. > > On 8 Jan 2014 01:31, "Jacob Clark" <iamjacobclark@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I have modified the patch to address the above discussions: >> >> https://edit.php.net/index.php?patchID=1098&project=PHP >> >> Thanks >> Jacob. >> >> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:12 AM, Jacob Clark <iamjacobclark@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Hi Stelian/Hannes, >> > >> > I think this is a fair point, I will re-work the 'Getting Nginx' >> > section to point in the direction of the Nginx Wiki. >> > >> > As for moving the php-fpm binary there is currently no flag available >> > during ./configure to specify where the php-fpm binary is installed to >> > as far as I'm aware. >> > >> > The current live Apache 2.x setup manual >> > (http://www.php.net/manual/en/install.unix.apache2.php) also follows >> > the same procedure of moving the php.ini file after the binaries have >> > been built. >> > >> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:06 AM, Stelian Mocanita >> > <stelian.mocanita@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello everyone, >> >> >> >> The fine people at nginx have their self hosted repos for latest stable >> >> and >> >> even development mode, and I personally think we should only link to >> >> that >> >> (http://wiki.nginx.org/Install). Having a full blown "compile it >> >> yourself" >> >> in the docs will require maintenance on our part which is rather >> >> pointless >> >> since the nginx people are already doing it. >> >> >> >> Another point I want to raise is that if people do follow the compile >> >> guide, >> >> they will only get the core nginx, which is rather lite for current >> >> requirements and it would generate questions from users most likely. >> >> >> >> Regardsm >> >> Stelian >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Hannes Magnusson >> >> <hannes.magnusson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Jacob Clark <iamjacobclark@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > Hi, >> >>> > >> >>> > 1) When building Nginx from source you are able to be more precise >> >>> > over the type of binary you require, for example, is it possible to >> >>> > specify at compile time that you do not require the HTTP module, but >> >>> > only require the MAIL module. >> >>> > >> >>> > Or you may specify that you require the HTTP module with no other >> >>> > modules apart from the core module. >> >>> > >> >>> > The other advantage is actually acquiring the most up to date >> >>> > version, >> >>> > it's generally the case that most distributions distribute older >> >>> > versions of Nginx. >> >>> >> >>> Correct. It is the best way to get the latest of gratest nginx, but at >> >>> the same time, it is also the best way to guarantee that you will >> >>> never ever ever ever upgrade it either. >> >>> >> >>> I don't think this is something we should be recommending. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > 4) I am moving the php-fpm binary from the downloaded raw source to >> >>> > the /usr/local/bin as this is where subsequent php binaries are >> >>> > transferred too, it makes sense to move this also. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Shouldn't that be done with the correct install paths? >> >>> Am I missing something silly here? >> >>> >> >>> -Hannes >> >> >> >>