On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 07:54:29PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Arno Töll <deb...@toell.net> wrote:
> > So, as a start, web applications should recommend a web server like
> > this if they ship both, an Apache2 configuration file and a Lighttpd
> > configuration file:
> >
> > Recommends: apache2 | lighttpd | httpd
>
> What's the advantage over apache2 | httpd or just httpd?
"just httpd" would be evil:
There are 25 (sic) packages providing httpd in Debian, and when the
user neither has one installed nor specifies which one to install,
the package manager has to pick one.
Apache is a sane default in that case.
>...
> > For Apache, the libapache2-mod-php5 package could provide httpd-php
> > (among others, including FastCGI and FPM setups), for lighttpd we
> > would only need to set-up a running FastCGI + PHP-CGI environment at
> > postinst time, which is already mostly there, too. Likewise for nginx,
> > I guess. Then, PHP web applications could formulate dependencies like
> > this:
> >
> > Depends: libapache2-mod-php5 | whatever-alternative-php5 | httpd-php
> >
> > Now, people who would like to use Lighttpd instead of the default
> > Apache would only need to do a
> >
> > apt-get install lighttpd the-web-app
>
> Is that guaranteed to work if no pkg providing httpd-php is installed
> yet? Will apt-get pick the right httpd-php provider?
I guess that would be
apt-get install lighttpd-php5 the-web-app
And at that point I begin to doubt the value of the httpd-php idea.
>...
> Greetings,
> Olaf
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
