-----Alkuperäinen viesti----- From: Nick Kew
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 3:32 PM To: users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Debian way or standard On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 13:35 +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 1:02 PM, rap <rap@xxxxxx> wrote: > > The Debian style for Apache2 configuration is different from the standard > version. Are there reasons why I shouldn't/couldn't use the standard Apache > version from apache.org on top of Debian instead of the Debian version > packages? I'd rather use my time to learn a general version used most often > in mainframe computers / web hotels etc. I guess it's as simple as replacing (possibly after saving) the existing "/etc/apache2/apache2.conf" with your own.
That would be more work than building from scratch, as you'd lose the default config that comes bundled with any installation and reflects the build (e.g. builtin vs loadable modules). Debian has its own ideas about packaging. Some people like it. Pick one or the other and stick to it! Advantage of the Debian's package: apt will automate upgrades for you. Advantage of installing Apache package: you won't find yourself the wrong side of the documentation gap: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/04/apache_packages_support_vacuum/ -- Nick KewThanks Nick, yes, that article described the problem on the spot. The debian folks claim they make things easier but in fact they do quite the opposite when they distract folks from the source and its documentation. I found out this very soon after installing the Debian version and aquiring some reading. So its the standard way then. Now I only need good instructions for installation of standard binaries or building the whole thing from the scratch. Thanks folks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|