| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
In http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7728 dragonheart wrote: |
| 4 |
> If someone writes a webapp version of htdig I'll make wwwoffle |
| 5 |
> work with it. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
ht://dig is also listed as requiring webapp-ification in bug |
| 8 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53855 |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
After having a quick look at it on Friday I thought that htdig |
| 11 |
doesn't fit well with the webapps mindset. The bulk of the |
| 12 |
package is executables for index creation/maintenance that are |
| 13 |
currently installed into /usr/bin et al. Only htsearch and |
| 14 |
support HTML/images go into the website directories. While I |
| 15 |
could maintain that separation under webapps, with a single set |
| 16 |
of binaries, it would disallow the multiple version support in |
| 17 |
the webapps concept. Should the binaries be put somewhere else? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I also could not see a clean way for a post-install script to |
| 20 |
create a separate index databases, configuration files, and |
| 21 |
search page HTML (per VHOST) given the limited information |
| 22 |
available to the script. Perhaps I have missed an available |
| 23 |
environment variable identifying the VHOST name or some such. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
If you have any thoughts on the best way to approach these |
| 26 |
issues, I'm all ears. Alternatively, if someone else is tackling |
| 27 |
this... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Chris Williams |
| 32 |
Brisbane, Australia |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives