Re: 2 ftpds packages conflicts
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> On Tuesday, November 7, 2006 12:31 pm, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> So? It's up to the adminstrator to configure the packages after
>> The default of 0.0.0.0:80 may work as expected in some cases, but the
>> package maintainer cannot guarantee this. And that has nothing to do
>> with other installed packages. The maintainer just can't know what
>> the administrator expects.
>> Yes, this does go for the ftpds too. I don't see any reason why
>> you'd want more than one, but I don't really see any reason to impose
>> the restriction either. If the ftpds can be configured to listen to
>> anything else than 0.0.0.0:21, then the administrator should be
>> allowed to install more than one of them.
>> A warning about the need for manual configuration in the case of a
>> port/address conflict is probably a good idea, though.
> Yet there are also many users, probably those who are not
> professional administrators, that _need_ for everything to work out of the box.
Those users should be playing with gnome solitaire, not installing
web/ftp servers. An (http|ftp)d is not a kind of "works out-of-the-box"
thingy. The user installing a web/ftp server should be able to handle
this situation. If s/he is not, then s/he should not install it (for
security reasons, amongst others).
> Who should we help more: those who get paid to administer the machines,
> and are probably much more knowledable, or the occasional, home or
> small office user that doesn't have the knoweldge or the time to acquire it?
So should we help the home user, at the expense of making the work of
the administrator impossible? Instead of forcing the user to pop up
Google and to improve his/her knowledge?
Should we degrade the possibilities of Debian in the server area because
of the home user who can this way save 5 minutes of googling?
You can't be serious.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----