Re: [webmin-devel] Port of webmin to Fedora Core 0.94

[Jamie C. <jca...@we...>]

Perhaps then it should be treated as a new version of Redhat.. In your 
patch, you named all the config files config-fedora-core, when they 
really should have been config-redhat-linux-fedora. The os_list.txt 
line would be more like :

Redhat Linux		Fedora     redhat-linux		fedora     $etc_issue =~ 
/fedora\s*core.*\s0\.94\s/i || `cat /etc/redhat-release 2>&1` =~ 
/fedora\s*core.*\s0\.94\s/

This way, in modules where Fedora doesn't differ from 'standard' 
Redhat at all, there is no need for a separate config file, or 
addition to the os_support= entry in module.info files.. and config 
files like config-*-linux will be used on Fedora as well.

Of course, if it is radically different from the standard Redhat 
releases then this may not make sense. Is it?

  - Jamie

Dan Tucny wrote:
> It was based virtually entirely on RH10... I was thinking about making
> webmin just treat Fedora as RH10, but decided against it in the
> interests of preparing for the possibility of future changes without
> impacting the existing RH code and 'doing a proper job' of the port
> etc...
> 
> Dan
> 
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 04:41, Jamie Cameron wrote:
> 
>>Your patch looks cool, but I think it would have made more sense to
>>have webmin treat Fedora as another Redhat version, or better still the
>>same as an existing version. Was your port based on one of the existing RH
>>releases, such as 9 or 10?
>>
>> - Jamie
>>
>>Dan Tucny <da...@tu...> wrote ..
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>I've been doing a bit of work porting the 1.113 development release of
>>>webmin to Fedora Core 0.94, Test 2, Severn...
>>>
>>>It all appears to work so I've made a patch...
>>>
>>>The patch can be found on the webmin sourceforge site under patches...
>>>specifically...
>>>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=816843&group_id=17457&atid=317457
>>>
>>>I hope it's useful...
>>>
>>>Thanks,