> What we're especially looking for is report of successful or failed
> startup of the X server. With 7.4.0, the server would crash during
> startup. But with 7.5.0, none of us could reproduce the problem.
Works fine here - I had to update libdrm as well to get it to build.
The devise is 'RV620 LE
.
> Note official packages reflecting this sitation will start building on
> Wednesday 8th of October and hit your mirrors as soon as possible for both
> quarterly branch and regular head.
Has this happened ? I was expecting to see an ATI UMS port appeat, and
for the non UMS port to move to ve
> I may try that. But I'm at a loss as to what that has to do with
> getting php5 to build. As (mentioned earlier) I am unable to find
> where php5 does anything more that to ask if I'm using Apache 1.3 || 2.
This puzzles me - my php5 from ports doesnt ask this at all. You just
build it and it fin
> Well, to be Frank with you ( even though my name is Chris ;) ), having
> to migrate ~50 conf files/layouts on top of "mastering" the /new/ Apache
> way of doing things, on top of aquainting myself with the way the
> modules /now/ do things, just isn't going to fit in my schedule. Oh sure
> I hear
> also already subscribed to the Apache dev list). My conclusion was that
> the ultimate migration to 2, would be a lot smoother, and easier if moving
> to 2.0 - the layout of both the server, and conf files are /very/ similar
> (to 1.3).
O.K., that makes a lot of sense - I can't remember how I di
> After several failed attempts to get a /stable/ installation of Apache13-ssl
> and friends built and installed from source (see thread: /usr/bin/objformat,
> for more background). I chose to look at the possibility of using Apache 2.0.
Out of interest, why did you choose 2.0 and not 2.2 ? When I
