Aurélien GÉRÔME [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:10:51AM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the
Michael == Michael Poole [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Why do you think these servers conflict with each other?
... because, generally speaking, the servers will be automatically
installed at installation, and if the port is in use, then
installation may fail. Also, the server to grab
Mario Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:38:03AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Wouldn't relay-chat-server or relay-chat-daemon be a better name.
I think no, we also call it httpd and not web-server or
hypertext-transfer-protocol-server.
That's a historical
Brian May writes:
Michael == Michael Poole [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Why do you think these servers conflict with each other?
... because, generally speaking, the servers will be automatically
installed at installation, and if the port is in use, then
installation may fail.
Russ Allbery writes (Re: Request for virtual package ircd):
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
m-t-a's must conflict because they are required by policy to provide a
sendmail program at a fixed filesystem location.
I was about to say the same thing earlier, but then realized that we
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:10:51AM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 06:34:41PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
It's also possible to run multiple FTP servers, each listening on a
different port, but all the packaged ftp daemons Conflicts:
ftp-server.
That is bad, IMO. (and chance to raise my opinion about virtual
packages ;) )
Conflicts tag
On 12/10/06 at 00:10 +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
Hello,
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 08:55:57AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Those packages should not depend on ircd anyway, because the service and
the ircd can run on different systems.
Ok, this is a good argument.
I think the oppinion is more or less clear:
Some people think it would be a nice idea,
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:10:51AM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
Hello,
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 09:14:19AM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
Ok, this is a good argument.
I think the oppinion is more or less clear:
Some people think it would be a nice idea, BUT it can be also a problem
because some people want more than one Ircd on a system.
I only wanted to ask you
Jeremy Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 09:14:19AM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
Ok, this is a good argument.
I think the oppinion is more or less clear:
Some people think it would be a nice idea, BUT it can be also a problem
because some
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 08:54:15AM +0200, Milan P. Stanic wrote:
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 06:34:41PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
It's also possible to run multiple FTP servers, each listening on a
different port, but all the packaged ftp daemons Conflicts:
ftp-server.
That is bad, IMO. (and
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
m-t-a's must conflict because they are required by policy to provide a
sendmail program at a fixed filesystem location.
I was about to say the same thing earlier, but then realized that we
*could* deal with that via alternatives. And there's actually
Hello,
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
logically conflict with each other. So I would think an
Am Donnerstag 12 Oktober 2006 00:10 schrieb Mario Iseli:
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
On Oct 12, Mario Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
logically
Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Oct 12, Mario Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:38:03AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Wouldn't relay-chat-server or relay-chat-daemon be a better name.
I think no, we also call it httpd and not web-server or
hypertext-transfer-protocol-server.
Only if they really work with _all_ of them, even new ones. Really?
Mario Iseli writes:
Hello,
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
logically conflict with each other.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/11/06 17:50, tony mancill wrote:
Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Oct 12, Mario Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as described in
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
I announce here my idea of the virtual package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/11/06 17:58, Mario Iseli wrote:
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:38:03AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Wouldn't relay-chat-server or relay-chat-daemon be a better name.
I think no, we also call it httpd and not web-server or
22 matches
Mail list logo
