Menu
▾
▴
Re: [webmin-devel] Port of webmin to Fedora Core 0.94
|
From: Dan T. <da...@tu...> - 2003-10-04 11:51:53
|
If this was to support a code named prerelease beta of Redhat Linux e.g. Severn, then having it as Redhat Linux Severn with a version of severn would be fine... However... Redhat Linux (the product) is no more... (The Redhat Enterprise Linux product does still exist) What's actually happened is that what may have originally been planned to be Redhat Linux 10 has in fact become the starting point of the Fedora Project. Fedora Core 0.94 is the current beta/test 2, there will be a beta/test 3 coming out in the next couple of weeks followed by release 1 at the beginning of November... After this the cycle will start for release 2 etc. Lots could change between releases... Check out http://fedora.redhat.com for more info... I think it should be split out from Redhat, if for nothing else, to make it easier to cater for release differences in fedora core... However... I respect that webmin is your project, so I'll leave the decision in your hands :) Thanks, Dan On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 05:00, Jamie Cameron wrote: > 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, > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > - > Forwarded by the Webmin development list at web...@we... > To remove yourself from this list, go to > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webadmin-devel |
