"Jacob S." <stormspotter@6texans.net> writes: > On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 17:13:01 -0700 > Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca> wrote: > >> > For example if I need apache 2, it would be necessary to compile >> > that than starting straight editing httpd.conf as it will be in >> > RedHat as it is installed by the default installation. >> >> Hmm, that's odd, there's apache2 packages in unstable. Are you sure >> you bothered to answer this for yourself before you mailed? > > hmm... I didn't see him say he'd be using unstable. Your next e-mail > even indicates he would be choosing Debian for it's stability... but > then using unstable? It wouldn't surprise me if there's apache2 backports, since apache's (obviously) fairly popular, and all the good stuff usually gets an unofficial source or two for backports. Yeah, it's unofficial, so you'll want to do your own testing there. Though on the upside, you only have to go test the backport packages instead of the entire distro when you're working with stable. >> > By the way any suggestions about email servers? >> > I am between qmail and postfix >> >> Just use exim. You can do far more, much more easily. > > I prefer qmail's functionality, Stelios, mainly because I have several > virtual domains and it seems to handle that the best. But then again, it > would put you back to having to compile something. Just my $0.02. I generally consider DJB's licensing and bizarre conventions (thousands of files all undescriptively named qmail*, screwball output of his FTP server, etc) generally makes DJB's software ethically, legally and technically challenging to use; a state of permanent quasi-brokenness.
Attachment:
pgp6wuoOScF2O.pgp
Description: PGP signature