On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 12:46, Frank Pater wrote: > This is one of the reasons we chose not to use the RPM. The > regular source install is simple enough with CentOS 4 (you > can't use the mod_perl RPM, but we didn't have trouble building > our own mod_perl 2.0.2), and we have a dedicated box for RT, > so the lack of an RPM is not a big deal. As always, ymmv, but > we were able to inistall AT and RTx::Shredder with no problems.
I agree that installing RT from source is not a problem, but it is very nice to have all those perl modules built as RPMs and automatically pulled in - and in the fedora case know that there won't be conflicts with the system versions because they are the system versions. My production version is hand-installed on Centos with fastcgi but I'm testing the Centos yum/RPM-install: http://wiki.bestpractical.com/index.cgi?RPMInstall which seems great other than installing AT. I'm considering building one using the perl module RPMs but then adding RT from source so AT will work. By the way, what's wrong with the stock Centos mod_perl? Mine is mod_perl-2.0.1-1.rhel4 and seems to work fine. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html
