2002-08-13 11:34:33

by Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: TUX in 2.4.20?

hi all

perhaps it's time to ditch khttpd in favour for Tux now? I beleive 2.4.20
would be a nice time to do this.

anyone?

roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk, Datavaktmester

Computers are like air conditioners.
They stop working when you open Windows.


2002-08-13 12:23:36

by Alan

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: TUX in 2.4.20?

On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 12:39, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
> hi all
>
> perhaps it's time to ditch khttpd in favour for Tux now? I beleive 2.4.20
> would be a nice time to do this.
>
> anyone?

Tux is invasive. It isnt a clean simple patching job.

2002-08-13 14:18:36

by Oliver Neukum

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: TUX in 2.4.20?

Am Dienstag, 13. August 2002 13:39 schrieb Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk:
> hi all
>
> perhaps it's time to ditch khttpd in favour for Tux now? I beleive
> 2.4.20 would be a nice time to do this.
>
> anyone?

2.4 is a stable series. Removing something needs a very good
reason, which just isn't there.

Regards
Oliver

2002-08-13 23:26:07

by Kelsey Hudson

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: TUX in 2.4.20?

On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:

> hi all
>
> perhaps it's time to ditch khttpd in favour for Tux now? I beleive 2.4.20
> would be a nice time to do this.
>
> anyone?

I tend to disagree; the purpose of having a "stable version" is that it's
just that: stable. i.e. no new features, just bug fixes.

Of course, VM rewrites and the like are hardly bug fixes, per se, but
they're not "new features" either.

Kelsey Hudson [email protected]
Software Engineer/UNIX Systems Administrator
Compendium Technologies, Inc (619) 725-0771
---------------------------------------------------------------------------