>
> Yes, i saw your modifications to the php package, and i'm going to use it.
> Waited to ask why the change was not accepted until i really know, that
> it works.
>
Okay, thanks for the information!
> >
> > So at this point I had decided not to make the changes. I was hoping to
> > be able to u
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, Mark Keller wrote:
> As David says, I have been thinking of making an apache2 package that doesn't
> conflict with apache. I have yet to do that for a couple of reasons.
>
> First, we also use the shared core features and apxs also conflicts between
> the two. I haven't d
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, David M. Fetter wrote:
> [...]
> Yes, what would be nice is if we could make a Require statement that can
> include something like "apache||apache2". That would be helpful in
> numerous cases.
Yes, but alternative requirements are not supported by RPM. The only
thing one ca
As David says, I have been thinking of making an apache2 package that doesn't
conflict with apache. I have yet to do that for a couple of reasons.
First, we also use the shared core features and apxs also conflicts between
the two. I haven't decided whether I want to rename apxs to apxs2 or not
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 21:51 +0100, Matthias Kurz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, David M. Fetter wrote:
>
> > We should they conflict? In our environment we actually have specific
> > need to run both versions. We cannot have both installed however due to
> > as far as we can tell only two confli
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, David M. Fetter wrote:
> We should they conflict? In our environment we actually have specific
> need to run both versions. We cannot have both installed however due to
> as far as we can tell only two conflicting files which are a man page
> and logrotate. Personally, it
We should they conflict? In our environment we actually have specific
need to run both versions. We cannot have both installed however due to
as far as we can tell only two conflicting files which are a man page
and logrotate. Personally, it seems to me that it would be better to
rename the conf
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, Thomas Lotterer wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, Matthias Kurz wrote:
>
>> All said.
>>
>I want to make the proposal of renaming the apache2 package to httpd.
>This would align the name with Linux Distros and ASF terminology. It
>would also allow both packages to coexist for a p
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, Matthias Kurz wrote:
> All said.
>
I want to make the proposal of renaming the apache2 package to httpd.
This would align the name with Linux Distros and ASF terminology. It
would also allow both packages to coexist for a prolonged time and no
longer suggest that the apache2
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005, Matthias Kurz wrote:
> All said.
But "apache2.spec" contains a "Conflicts: apache". Isn't this enough? I
though if one package contains the "Conflicts:" RPM will complain. Do we
really need a "Conflicts: apache2" also in "apache.spec"?
All said.
(mk)
--
Matthias Kurz; Fuldastr. 3; D-28199 Bremen; VOICE +49 421 53 600 47
>> Im prämotorischen Cortex kann jeder ein Held sein. (bdw) <<
__
The OpenPKG Projectwww.openpkg.org
11 matches
Mail list logo
