Re: virtual package for apache required?
Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>
>>apache and apache-ssl should both depend on the apache-common and
>>provide apache-virtual (or else) and the other packages (as php) could
>>then depend on it.
>
>why not make apache-ssl an addon to apache, and depend on it ?
>it wouldn't be a harm for most people to have on additional file on their hard
>disk.
apache is version 1.3beta.
apache-ssl is based on version 1.2 of apache since there is no SSL
patch yet for the apache 1.3 beta version.
>
>how many files are different in apache and apache-ssl ?
Because of the difference in the main version, most of the binaries
are different. As for the SSL part, only (as far as I can see) the
apache binary itself and some support scripts are different.
>can apache-ssl be an optional module to apache ?
You configure it like a module, but it is compiled into the binary and
there are also some patches in different places.
>or can apache-ssl be equivalent to apache, with the only difference
>in /usr/sbin/apache and some additional doc files ?
It's more than that.
>
>is apache-ssl slower than normal apache (running without ssl) ?
>if so, people will run a normal apache, and an additional ssl apache.
People do both, use apache-ssl for http and https or use apache for
http and apache-ssl for https. And they all have god reasons for it.
That is why I tried to make both ways work.
Christoph
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: