httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Terbush <ra...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: Names
Date Thu, 11 Dec 1997 23:42:11 GMT
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > 
> > It's just that, a problem :-)
> > 
> > No really, I think that some sort of agreement is needed. For example,
> > the httpd.conf file vs. the apachectl file.
> > 
> > I, for one, would say that we should rename httpd to apache.
> > We should wait for 2.0 though to do that. In the meantime, we note
> > that the server is called Apache, and under UNIX the process name
> > is httpd and under Win32 it's apache. Ugg.
> 
> That isn't good enough. Either we call the Unix version apache, the
> Windows version httpd, or I sulk.
> 
> I still think my original suggestion is the way to go: call the Unix
> version apache and softlink httpd to it.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ben.

I agree. A symlink on the UNIX side is in order.






Mime
View raw message