Re: Search machine is ready

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Devrim GUNDUZ" <devrim(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Search machine is ready
Date: 2006-02-15 16:40:56
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4850858@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www

-----Original Message-----
From: Devrim GUNDUZ [mailto:devrim(at)commandprompt(dot)com]
Sent: Wed 2/15/2006 12:50 PM
To: Dave Page
Cc: Joshua D. Drake; Tom Lane; pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Search machine is ready

> Dave, why don't you use the vendor packages? I believe Joshua will use
> Fedora Core, and I'd use vendor Apache, etc.

I was assuming Debian - I could have sworn he mentioned apt at some point.

wrt the vendor packages, I do try to use them whereever possible, with a couple of exceptions:

- PHP (and occasionally Apache) is often not built the way I want it - either being full of junk, or missing things. I installed PHP5.1 from FreeBSD ports the other day though, and it does seem much more modular there now - dunno if the same applies to FC/Debian et al these days.

- Vendor changes. I don't like to run packages I know to have been changed by the vendor - for example, it was noted the other day that the Debian PostgreSQL packages contains patches that aren't in PGDG releases. In this case the only OS vendor I would trust with a modified PostgreSQL is Red Hat, for fairly obvious reasons.

> As a part of WWW team and CMD, I'd be happy to coordinate the stuff,
> BTW.

Please feel free :-)

Regards,Dave.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-02-15 17:05:25 Re: Search machine is ready
Previous Message Devrim GUNDUZ 2006-02-15 12:50:39 Re: Search machine is ready