mysql5 server and plain

[Bradley Giesbrecht]

On Jan 6, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Scott Haneda wrote:

> I am top posting, because you went over my head a little in that, so  
> I am at least going to go over the top on something :)
>
> To be honest, I totally forgot that someone may want to instal just  
> the mysql client, and may also do so without sudo involved.
>
> On a side note, you mention the mysql directories, which need to be  
> _mysql owned, which I also find to be the case, is this done in the  
> port or is this something the user is supposed to do?  The MAMP page  
> has the user doing it, if the port already does it, the MAMP page is  
> redundant.
>
> You bring up great points, and I do not see any real perfect  
> solutions to them.  What about having a mysql-client port, that is  
> obvious, then the mysql-server port, and that is it.  That makes the  
> most sense to me.  I would make the server depend on the client,  
> that is a liberty I would take, because they sort of go hand in hand.
>
> I agree with your comments about Apache, add to this, none of the  
> plists are set to run, so they just sit there, the user had to load  
> them.  I do not see any reason to avoid putting them in place.  Disc  
> space is cheap, I could literally afford to store the plists for  
> every MacPorts user there is :)
>
> There are a handful of softwares out there, seemingly the ones most  
> people are going to be coming here for, that are just too hard for  
> the average user to get up and running, I want to fix that.  Have  
> you seen a windows user get a AMP stack running, one download, one  
> exe, and they are up and running, with a GUI app to go with it.   
> This bothers me on so many levels, that they have this ease, on a  
> platform that neither the A, the M, or the P were developed for when  
> they first came out.

Doesn't XAMP (apachefriends.com) and MAMP (mamp.info) both have double  
clickable installers for Mac OS X?

> I have some questions about the mysql5-server port, I will post a  
> new message.  Thanks for your excellent thoughts on this.
>
> P.S. that D-ports issue came up on the pure-ftpd mail list today.  I  
> had a user move over here to use MP for pure-ftpd, and he was  
> confused.  I have the emails flagged, and want to move back on that  
> front again, but time is just not on my side these days.  Just did  
> not want you to think I flaked on your emails, they are all marked,  
> and I will follow up on them eventually. Thanks Ryan.
>
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> mysql5 installs the client and server software. mysql5-server  
>> installs the launchd plist and the directories a server would need.  
>> This mirrors the postgresql ports.
>>
>> There used to just be a mysql5 port with a +server variant, but  
>> this was awful because when installed as a dependency, or by  
>> someone who didn't yet understand variants, the port would be  
>> installed without the server launchd plist, and to get it, the user  
>> would have to recompile all of mysql5, which wasted a lot of time.  
>> *This* came up all the time for years and was worth discussion and  
>> resulted in what we have now.
>>
>> You might think just having a mysql5 port and making it always  
>> install the launchd plist would be better. But remember that it's  
>> not just the launchd plist: it's also the directories, which need  
>> to be owned by the mysql user. The user might be installing in a  
>> non-root prefix, might only need the client portion, and would not  
>> have permission to install the launchd plist nor to set the  
>> ownership of directories to a system user. Such a user could work  
>> around the launchd plist issue by setting startupitem_type to none  
>> in macports.conf, but the port would still have to know not to  
>> install the directories. Can a port query the startupitem type the  
>> user requested? If so, the port could do so and omit installing the  
>> server directories if ${startupitem.type} is none. In the end,  
>> however, you must admit this reduces transparency: Before, it was  
>> clear if you installed "mysql5 +server" you got a server, if you  
>> installed "mysql5" you didn't. Currently, if you install "mysql5- 
>> server" you
>  get a server, if you just install "mysql5" you don't. But if we  
> change the port to infer things based on the startupitem type, and  
> you look at "port installed" and see "mysql5", you don't know  
> whether it has server parts or not. I suppose (and I apologize, I'm  
> thinking this through as I'm typing) the startupitem.type-based  
> detection could lead to the port auto-selecting (or not) (using  
> default_variants) the +server variant. Hmm..... You know, that might  
> work.
>>
>> If we're thinking of removing mysql5-server, we should have similar  
>> thoughts about the postgresql and other ports that do this, and  
>> also about removing the +no_startupitem variant from ports like  
>> apache2, since a user who wants to install a purely server software  
>> like apache without a launchd plist is a) strange and apparently  
>> running with diminished privileges, and therefore b) must logically  
>> want the same for all other ports as well, and c) can achieve this  
>> in macports.conf.
> -- 
> Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ *
>
> _______________________________________________
> macports-dev mailing list
> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20100106/97372322/attachment-0001.html>