2007/9/4, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 9/4/07, eliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Point taken, but:
> > >
> > > Why not call it apache-httpd then?
> > >
> > > 'httpd' remains a very generic word.
> >
> > This has been the name of the Apache Foundation's webserver for quite
> > a
On 9/4/07, eliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Point taken, but:
> >
> > Why not call it apache-httpd then?
> >
> > 'httpd' remains a very generic word.
>
> This has been the name of the Apache Foundation's webserver for quite
> a while now.
> It is standard, and easily recognizable as such.
>
>
> Point taken, but:
>
> Why not call it apache-httpd then?
>
> 'httpd' remains a very generic word.
This has been the name of the Apache Foundation's webserver for quite
a while now.
It is standard, and easily recognizable as such.
It would venture to guess that it would cause more problems for m
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 07:22:29PM +0200, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
> > Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
>
> > Because apache is not httpd, httpd is httpd from the Apache software
> > foundation.
>
> Point taken, but:
>
> Why not call it apache-httpd then?
>
> 'httpd' remains a very generic word.
I'm pre
> Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
> Because apache is not httpd, httpd is httpd from the Apache software
> foundation.
Point taken, but:
Why not call it apache-httpd then?
'httpd' remains a very generic word.
___
arch mailing list
arch@archlinux.org
http:/
Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Arch's Apache2 package is pretty good, as usual.
>
> But why is it refered to as "httpd" in /etc and its init script?
> You know, httpd is a pretty generic name...
>
> Anyone up to tell me?
>
> Leslie
>
Because apache is not httpd, httpd is httpd from
Hi folks,
Arch's Apache2 package is pretty good, as usual.
But why is it refered to as "httpd" in /etc and its init script?
You know, httpd is a pretty generic name...
Anyone up to tell me?
Leslie
___
arch mailing list
arch@archlinux.org
http://a
