On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:07:32PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 04:02:43PM +0000, Jules Bean wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Martin Schulze wrote: > > > > > Brian White wrote: > > > > > If you file this as bug agains Apache you need to file it against all > > > > > other > > > > > httpd's that support cgi-bin as well. Thus I assume that you need to > > > > > modify > > > > > policy first. > > > > > > > > I figured I'd start with the big one and then work my way around. > > > > However, > > > > somebody has reassign the bug to debian-policy since it is official > > > > Debian > > > > policy to do it the way it is. I wish somebody had told me that when I > > > > originally sent mail around asking for opinions about this idea. > > > > > > I'm sorry but I didn't see it - and I still don't see its benefits. Now > > > it's > > > up to the policy group anyway. > > > > Do you see the benefits of having the package system control /usr/bin, and > > the local admin putting his programs into /usr/local/bin? > > The thing with /usr/local seperations in 1) software installs get really > complex so they need to seperate system software from custom installed > things and 2) it's also used to speed up reinstalls. > > I don't see this pertaining to cgi's. With the /usr/local convention it > doesn't require any extra effort to use the programs (just add > /usr/local/bin to PATH) but with a cgi-bin/cgi-lib seperation you will > have to make two distinct calls to different URL's in order to call Debian > cgi's and locally installed cgi's. > How about changing apache to support something like a cgi path? That would let us keep stuff in /usr/lib/cgi-bin and let the local web admin supplement or override it with her stuff in, say, /usr/local/lib/cgi-bin. I think this would address all the issues raised in this thread (but raises the question of "what about other httpd servers?").
> .... Thank you, Steve Bowman
