It seem as apache-2.0.54-r10 and later includes a totally new structure for config files and other paths compared to apache-2.0.54-r7 and earlier. This makes it very difficult to properly upgrade (emerge -u apache). A warning should be included that notifies the user that they have to redo their config files fully. This could be a major thing for a larger site, or even a small home setup. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. have apache-2.0.54-r7 installed and configured with a few vhosts, ssl, php etc. 2. emerge -u apache to r11 Actual Results: After upgrading from apache-2.0.54-r7 to apache-2.0.54-r11 your config files are now broken and you have different duplicates etc. For example you will have both /etc/ apache2/httpd.conf and /etc/apach2/conf/apache.conf. It is not clear what has become of the files in vhosts and modules.d or the commonapache2.conf. Expected Results: A clean installation with some minor changes to the config files.
There is einfo in the ebuild. Also see http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/apache/upgrading.xml
(In reply to comment #1) > There is einfo in the ebuild. Also see > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/apache/upgrading.xml Indeed, but it is certainly not a warning that comes in advance - which I was asking for. When you have installed and see the "Configuration locations have changed, you will need to migrate..." it is already to late unless you have done backups and restore. The warning should be a pre-install one.
In reply to myself :) To me, the changed file locations and different structure to config files is a major change and not a minor update as you would expect from a -r7 to r-11 release. This is what makes it more dangerous. Sure a major version number change would cause more consern and make you read up more on the changes made. At least then you are better prepared for larger changes to the application.
(In reply to comment #3) > To me, the changed file locations and different structure to config files is a major > change and not a minor update as you would expect from a -r7 to r-11 release. Did you at least have a look at the ChangeLog? > Sure a major version number change would cause > more consern and make you read up more on the changes made. At least then you are > better prepared for larger changes to the application. I wonder if you just installed Gentoo? There are virtually hundreds of bugs related to changing of the Apache layout. And BTW - this was announced in December (!) last year in the forums. You have the docs cited above to help you with upgrade. And no - major versions follow upstream, also - there have been dual layouts co-existing in the tree (stable vs. unstable/masked) for months, since version 2.0.52. Closing again.
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > To me, the changed file locations and different structure to config files is a > major > > change and not a minor update as you would expect from a -r7 to r-11 release. > > Did you at least have a look at the ChangeLog? Yes, but it doesn't actually tell you of so large changes. > > Sure a major version number change would cause > > more consern and make you read up more on the changes made. At least then you are > > better prepared for larger changes to the application. > > I wonder if you just installed Gentoo? There are virtually hundreds of bugs > related to changing of the Apache layout. And BTW - this was announced in > December (!) last year in the forums. > > You have the docs cited above to help you with upgrade. And no - major versions > follow upstream, also - there have been dual layouts co-existing in the tree > (stable vs. unstable/masked) for months, since version 2.0.52. > Yes, the docs existing are enough to see what has changed etc. But you are right though that I have not been folowing the forums so much around this and most likely many other things. I did not realize that there was so many issues regarding these layout changes. I never noticed things before concerning this. I just thought a warning could have been included in the ebuild - that would show this info before the actuall compiling/installing started. I did not mean that the layout changes should not be, or anything like that. It couldn't hurt to include it, could it? Sorry for letting this turn into such a big thing.
(In reply to comment #5) > I never noticed things before concerning this. > I just thought a warning could have been included in the ebuild - that would >show this info before the actuall compiling/installing started. I did not mean >that the layout changes should not be, or anything like that. It couldn't hurt > to include it, could it? There is an info displayed after install, that's where it makes most sense, if you put it at the start of emerge then most people will ignore it anyway and it will just scroll by. Anyway, I'm really suprised that just have only noticed this issue now - there has been a lot of fuss around this for months... ;) > Sorry for letting this turn into such a big thing. No problem. Thanks for your comments.
