David Lutterkort wrote:
intrigued (for lack of a better word) by the state of the review of
mod_passenger (BZ 470696) I spent a little time reviving Jeroen's spec
file and bringing it up to date for passenger 2.2.15. Updated spec and a
probably braindead mod_passenger.conf attached (sadly, the passenger
SRPM seems to have vanished from Jeroen's site).
It has merely moved:
As I see it, there's three issues with the spec right now:
* the stance of upstream on using a stock boost. I think if we
ever want to have passenger in Fedora, somebody with the spare
time will need to browbeat^W handhold upstream to send their
It will actually need to be someone willing to hold hands upstream as well as
capable to poke around the boost stack.
To me, the former isn't necessarily the problem but my knowledge of boost is
* the scripts installed into /usr/bin (passenger-status etc.)
broken since they expect to be executed from the gemdir. We need
to add wrapper scripts similar to what 'gem install' to /usr/bin
I think I shipped some patch(es) for this.
* passenger is horribly broken with SELinux. I tried following
instructions from the Passenger manual and somebody's SELinux
policy to no avail; passenger can not create its socket with
that. Some of the instructions in  sound odd, like doing
'chcon -R httpd_sys_content_t' on the gemdir
I've had a conversation about this before, and it'll take some cycles to come
up with a sane /var/lib/passenger/ type of security context, some policy to
allow httpd_t to do something or the other, and so forth.
The very ugly version of a custom policy that I use now is attached.