On 23 September 2014 17:58, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
>
> > Isn't that an implementation detail? Is Python version relevant for the
> > on-the-wire WSGI protocol?
>
> WSGI is an API, not a wire protocol. The Python version of the WSGI
> server would also be the Python version the code is run under, so
At Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:51:56 +0200,
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> Quoting Brian May (2014-09-23 08:02:22)
> >On 29 July 2014 19:04, Jeroen Dekkers <[1]jer...@dekkers.ch> wrote:
> >
> > As far as I can see this is a bug in the apache2 packaging. The httpd
> > virtual package should be
Quoting Brian May (2014-09-23 08:02:22)
>On 29 July 2014 19:04, Jeroen Dekkers <[1]jer...@dekkers.ch> wrote:
>
> As far as I can see this is a bug in the apache2 packaging. The httpd
> virtual package should be provided by the apache2 package, not the
> apache2-bin package, beca
On 29 July 2014 19:04, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> As far as I can see this is a bug in the apache2 packaging. The httpd
> virtual package should be provided by the apache2 package, not the
> apache2-bin package, because the apache2-bin package doesn't provide a
> working webserver. Bug report I just
Quoting Brian May (2014-07-30 02:54:10)
> On 29 July 2014 19:04, Jeroen Dekkers <[1]jer...@dekkers.ch> wrote:
>
> As far as I can see this is a bug in the apache2 packaging. The httpd
> virtual package should be provided by the apache2 package, not the
> apache2-bin package, because
On 29 July 2014 19:04, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> As far as I can see this is a bug in the apache2 packaging. The httpd
> virtual package should be provided by the apache2 package, not the
> apache2-bin package, because the apache2-bin package doesn't provide a
> working webserver. Bug report I just
On 29 July 2014 09:40, Brian May wrote:
> if [ -e /usr/share/apache2/apache2-maintscript-helper ] ; then
> . /usr/share/apache2/apache2-maintscript-helper
> apache2_invoke enconf package.conf
> elif dpkg-query -f '${Version}' -W 'apache2.2-common' > /dev/null 2>&1 ;
> then
> # if t
At Tue, 29 Jul 2014 17:29:46 +1000,
Brian May wrote:
>
> On 29 Jul 2014 16:44, "Wouter Verhelst" wrote:
> > No, I don't.
> >
> > What brian really wants is apache2 or apache2-bin. In the case of
> > apache2-bin, he needs an additional dependency on libapache2-mod-wsgi.
> >
> > Really, it should b
On 29 July 2014 18:42, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> No. Use in one shared config file.
> At least that's what I've been told, and what makes sense to me.
>
I wasn't aware of IfVersion. Thanks for the tip.
--
Brian May
Brian May wrote:
>* "apache2-reverse-dependency-calls-invoke-rc.d" - due to legacy fall back
>code that restarts Apache2.2 automatically.
Yeah, I'm overriding this one too.
>* "non-standard-apache2-configuration-name" - due to the fact I need to
>supply different configuration files for apache2.
On 29 Jul 2014 16:44, "Wouter Verhelst" wrote:
> No, I don't.
>
> What brian really wants is apache2 or apache2-bin. In the case of
> apache2-bin, he needs an additional dependency on libapache2-mod-wsgi.
>
> Really, it should be
>
> apache2 | libapache2-mod-wsgi, apache2 | apache2-bin
>
> to do s
Op dinsdag 29 juli 2014 08:02:43 schreef Jean-Christophe Dubacq:
> [ ⏰ 29/07/2014 07:55 ] [ ✎ Wouter Verhelst ]
>
> > Op dinsdag 29 juli 2014 10:51:45 schreef Brian May:
> >> So ideally I only want to depend on libapache2-mod-wsgi if apache2 is
> >> installed, but this is not possible.
> >
> > Su
Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
>[ ⏰ 29/07/2014 07:55 ] [ ✎ Wouter Verhelst ]
>> Op dinsdag 29 juli 2014 10:51:45 schreef Brian May:
>>> So ideally I only want to depend on libapache2-mod-wsgi if apache2 is
>>> installed, but this is not possible.
>> Sure it is.
>>
>> Depends: apache2 | libapache2-mo
On 29 July 2014 16:02, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> You surely meant httpd |libapache2-mod-wsgi, apache2 | httpd .
>
>
Not convinced that will work.
e.g. if apache-bin is already installed, that will satisfy the httpd
dependency, so it won't look at libapache2-mod-wsgi.
--
Brian May
[ ⏰ 29/07/2014 07:55 ] [ ✎ Wouter Verhelst ]
> Op dinsdag 29 juli 2014 10:51:45 schreef Brian May:
>> So ideally I only want to depend on libapache2-mod-wsgi if apache2 is
>> installed, but this is not possible.
> Sure it is.
>
> Depends: apache2 | libapache2-mod-wsgi, apache2 | httpd
>
> is perfe
Op dinsdag 29 juli 2014 10:51:45 schreef Brian May:
> So ideally I only want to depend on libapache2-mod-wsgi if apache2 is
> installed, but this is not possible.
Sure it is.
Depends: apache2 | libapache2-mod-wsgi, apache2 | httpd
is perfectly legal and will do what you want.
--
It is easy to
On 29 July 2014 09:40, Brian May wrote:
> Fair enough, change that depends to depends on "apache2 | httpd".
>
> However, now when I install it, for reasons I don't understand, apt-get
> prefers to install apache2-bin over apache2 (thought it should default to
> the first item???). This provides h
On 1/21/06, Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > On 1/21/06, Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> [..]
> >>> A lot of those bugs are quite old and some appear to be trivial to
> >>> fix, but they don't have a single response fro
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 1/21/06, Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Olaf van der Spek wrote:
[..]
>>> A lot of those bugs are quite old and some appear to be trivial to
>>> fix, but they don't have a single response from you.
>>> Could you please tell why?
>> Most likely because the
On 1/21/06, Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > Hi Debian developers,
> >
> > Does any of you know about the status of Apache2?
>
> It works flawlessly on several places where I have deployed it.
>
> > I've send the message below to listed email address and I've
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> Hi Debian developers,
>
> Does any of you know about the status of Apache2?
It works flawlessly on several places where I have deployed it.
> I've send the message below to listed email address and I've asked at
> IRC but I haven't received any response.
[..]
> A lot o
Are there any plans for php support for apache2? I've played around w/
2.0.40 and a php cvs snapshot from sometime last week, w/ good results;
I'm looking forward to a php4-snapshot/php4-apache2 packages, or
something along those lines.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 04:35:13PM +0100, Thom May wrote:
>
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 04:12:55PM +0100, Matt Kern wrote:
> I can see the advantages of all the separate configuration
> directories, but cannot see quite how everything fits together. I
> understand the include mechanism and most of the files under
> /etc/apache2, but where are the referred to b
* Matt Kern ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> I have just installed apache2 (out of sid onto a woody based system)
> and am having a little trouble understanding the new methodology.
>
> I can see the advantages of all the separate configuration
> directories, but cannot see quite how everything fits
* Sander Smeenk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > > Very nice :) But I have 2 things:
> > > 1) Where's apache2-modules? Subversion depends on them!
> > Subversion needs to update :) Happily, I don't have to be back compat, but I
> > will add a provides fo
Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Very nice :) But I have 2 things:
> > 1) Where's apache2-modules? Subversion depends on them!
> Subversion needs to update :) Happily, I don't have to be back compat, but I
> will add a provides for apache2-modules. We scrapped the seperate deb as it
>
* Sander Smeenk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > As those of you who read slashdot know, Apache 2.0 was released last night.
> > deb http://pandora.debian.org/~thom/apache2 ./
>
> Very nice :) But I have 2 things:
>
> 1) Where's apache2-modules? Subversio
Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> As those of you who read slashdot know, Apache 2.0 was released last night.
> deb http://pandora.debian.org/~thom/apache2 ./
Very nice :) But I have 2 things:
1) Where's apache2-modules? Subversion depends on them!
2) Why is apache2 compiled against libd
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 11:24:22PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> > > Reasons enough to release woody+1 not too late.
> >
> > Speaking of which, woody+1 sounds like it's going to be a release similar to
> > link -- no huge changes to cause a prolongued release time.
>
> So, the Debian Installer is
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 11:19:49PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Reasons enough to release woody+1 not too late.
>
> Speaking of which, woody+1 sounds like it's going to be a release similar to
> link -- no huge changes to cause a prolongued release time.
So, the Debian Installer is already ready
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:49:16PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > Between Apache 2.0 and KDE 3 releasing, I don't think we need Anthony
> > > to tell us that a Debian release is imminent :-P
> >
> > I heard something about a new release of Gnome coming out too. Gcc 3.1's
> > also due soon. W
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:30:17AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:56:55AM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > Between Apache 2.0 and KDE 3 releasing, I don't think we need Anthony
> > to tell us that a Debian release is imminent :-P
>
> I heard something about a new releas
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 06:41:27PM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "we can tell that a Debian release is about to happen". Or
> > something.
> "I sense a disturbance in the force" ?
"As though millions of voices cried out, and ran apt-get."
Cheers,
Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "we can tell that a Debian release is about to happen". Or
> something.
"I sense a disturbance in the force" ?
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:56:55AM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Between Apache 2.0 and KDE 3 releasing, I don't think we need Anthony
> to tell us that a Debian release is imminent :-P
I heard something about a new release of Gnome coming out too. Gcc 3.1's
also due soon. We're also a touch be
I just realized this might be ambigous -- what I meant was not that
"we shouldn't be about to release woody", but rather that
"we can tell that a Debian release is about to happen". Or something.
Maybe I should keep my mouth shut when running on too little sleep :)
Daniel
--
/---
Between Apache 2.0 and KDE 3 releasing, I don't think we need Anthony
to tell us that a Debian release is imminent :-P
Daniel
--
/ Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---\
| "Progress just means bad things happen faster." |
|
37 matches
Mail list logo
