You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 2000/07/29 16:55:32 UTC
Configure for 2.0 ?
Anyone have any opinions on us having a Configure interface for 2.0 ?
I'm sure there are those who still prefer non-command-line interfaces :)
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"
Re: Configure for 2.0 ?
Posted by Manoj Kasichainula <ma...@io.com>.
On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 10:55:32AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Anyone have any opinions on us having a Configure interface for 2.0 ?
> I'm sure there are those who still prefer non-command-line interfaces :)
I'd have no objection except that it really shouldn't be caled
Configure. In 1.3, it just got too confusing referring to
capital-C-configure vs. little-c-configure all the time.
A shell script containing your favorite configuration options (like
config.nice but something you write yourself) would do the job, but
dealing with the necessary backslashing and ugly "--"'s everywhere
might be reason enough
Re: Configure for 2.0 ?
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
How exactly would you do that? The best I can think of is something like
the config.nice, only with more comments. Is that what you have in mind?
Ryan
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Anyone have any opinions on us having a Configure interface for 2.0 ?
> I'm sure there are those who still prefer non-command-line interfaces :)
> --
> ===========================================================================
> Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
> "Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------