On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:47:49 -0500, Darrick Hartman (lists) wrote: >Darrick Hartman (lists) wrote: >>> Yeah... I realized shortly after I send that I was thinking of >>> tighthttpd (or whatever that other ACME server was). Maybe we should >>> be looking at lighttpd. How much bigger are the binaries? >>> >> >> That actually depends on how many modules we were to include. The >> actually lighttpd binary is only 100K larger. >> >> I'm updating the package quickly (almost done). I'll be committing the >> update shortly. > >The lighttpd binary is 144k >The modules (if we include all of the modules) add about 600k. We >probably don't need all of the modules. > >Long term, if we want to add provisioning support etc, we'll want to go >this way as it offers alot more options than mini_httpd.
Provisioning support would be really great! I kinda thought that it was already in there, but that I had some problem as I could never get it quite working as I wanted. Michael -- Michael Graves mgraves<at>mstvp.com http://blog.mgraves.org o713-861-4005 c713-201-1262 sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] skype mjgraves [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Astlinux-users mailing list Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
