On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 10:03:46AM -0600, someone wrote:
: Hi Heiko...
:
: What's missing from your proposal is any sense of *why* you want to do this.
:
: : I'd like to create a virtual package name:
:
: : either ftp-server
: : or ftpd
:
: Is there anything that depends on the presence of an FTP daemon? If not,
there
: is no need for a virtual package name.
Imagine a package ``internet server'' or a pre-selection called
``internet server'', depending on:
httpd, ftpd, ...
: : Additional I'd like to establish the ``alternatives'' mechanism for
: : ftpd. Making a simple management of multiple ftp servers
: : possible.
:
: I don't see the the point. Are there many cases of systems with more than
: one ftpd installed? That seems very unlikely to me. Plus, the daemons have
: wildly different configuration mechanisms...
Not many cases, but I don't like to make the different ftpd packages
conflicting. I can imagine a setup where one ftp daemon is used for
ordinary public file services while an other daeamon is tested/used on an
private port or probably on a different IP ...
It's true, that there are different configuration mechanisms, but all
daemons run w/o any options in a reasonable usable way. The
alternatives make it possible to use the above setup (for the one who
knows).
And, probably the reason is the same as for the virtual package ``httpd''.
All the httpds have different configurations too.
Heiko
--
email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp : A1 7D F6 7B 69 73 48 35 E1 DE 21 A7 A8 9A 77 92
finger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
