Apache2 in default Ubuntu install
harry.ubuntu at harry.lu
Fri Aug 13 04:55:28 UTC 2010
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 03:55:24AM +0100, Phillip Whiteside wrote:
> Not wishing to get involved in arguments, but an LTS is just that. As apache
> is the major market of hhtp  it is imprortant for LTS that it will be
> able to be supported for five years. This would not be possible with
> > Why is apache2 in the default Ubuntu install?
> > I upgraded from 9.10 to 10.04 LTS today, and the upgrade procedure
> > installed Apache2 onto my box, even though I have had it autoremoved for a
> > long time.
> > It also did this on another server I upgraded, and that server runs
> > lighttpd too!
> > >Selecting previously deselected package apache2.2-bin.
> > >Unpacking apache2.2-bin (from .../apache2.2-bin_2.2.14-5ubuntu8_i386.deb)
> > ...
> > >Selecting previously deselected package apache2-utils.
> > >Unpacking apache2-utils (from .../apache2-utils_2.2.14-5ubuntu8_i386.deb)
> > ...
> > >Selecting previously deselected package apache2.2-common.
> > >Unpacking apache2.2-common (from
> > .../apache2.2-common_2.2.14-5ubuntu8_i386.deb) ...
> > >Selecting previously deselected package apache2-mpm-prefork.
> > >Unpacking apache2-mpm-prefork (from
> > .../apache2-mpm-prefork_2.2.14-5ubuntu8_i386.deb) ...
> > Why do you do this, Ubuntu developers? Apache2 isn't required for an Ubuntu
> > install, and heck, it SHOULDN'T be in a default install. If a user wants to
> > run a httpd, they can install it themselves.
You missed the point. I am *not* suggesting apache1 be added instead of apache2, I am saying NO apache *at all* should be installed "out-of-the-box".
I found out why though, it's packaged with php5, which is also pretty stupid to do. If a user installs PHP, they should also install any httpd they want. Not Apache automatically.
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss