Re: Request for virtual package ircd
Mario Iseli writes:
> Hello,
>
> as described in
> http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
> I announce here my idea of the virtual package ircd. When I count
> correctly are at the moment 7 different IRC-daemons in Debian and they
> logically conflict with each other. So I would think an official virtual
> package would be a fine solution. There are also IRC services which work
> in general with all ircds, so it would be easier if those packages also
> could only depend on "ircd".
>
> I file now the bug against debian-policy and say thank you in advance
> for your answer.
Some people -- developers such as myself and some server hosting
companies -- find it useful to have several ircds installed on one
computer for testing purposes. Artificially introducing conflicts
hurts these users.
Why do you think these servers conflict with each other? There are
virtual packages for many network services, but not all -- for
example, there are no http-server or dns-server virtual packages. The
services with virtual packages almost universally use well-known ports
and (except for ftp-server) it does not make sense to run several of
them on one machine. In contrast, IRC, HTTP and DNS are often running
several instances on different ports or network interfaces.
Which IRC services work "in general with all ircds"? Anope is the
most compatible one I know, but most IRC services packages that I have
seen support just one or two variants of server-to-server protocol.
Michael Poole
Reply to: