Menu
▾
▴
Re: [webmin-devel] Port of webmin to Fedora Core 0.94
|
From: Dan T. <da...@tu...> - 2003-10-05 22:47:24
|
The Fedora Project is what was to be Red Hat Linux 10. Out of the Fedora Project come a couple of things... Fedora Core, the core distro, same sort of thing as you would have had with Red Hat Linux... Fedora Extras, Fedora Alternatives & Fedora Legacy... Anyway... How about this then? The following lines in os_list.txt... Fedora Core 0.94 redhat-linux 10.0 $etc_issue =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s0\.94\s/i || `cat /etc/redhat-release 2>&1` =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s0\.94\s/ Fedora Core 0.95 redhat-linux 10.0 $etc_issue =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s0\.95\s/i || `cat /etc/redhat-release 2>&1` =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s0\.95\s/ Fedora Core 1.0 redhat-linux 10.0 $etc_issue =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s1(\.0\)?s/i || `cat /etc/redhat-release 2>&1` =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s1(\.0)?\s/ That should cover us for upto and including release 1 of Fedora Core... I'll revisit the port once the test cycle for release 2 kicks off, that's when there will likely be changes and there won't be a Red Hat linux to base it on... Hopefully by then things will be a bit cleared... How's that sound?? Dan On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 13:50, Jamie Cameron wrote: > From reading their site, it looks like Fedora is a beta/development > version of the next freely available redhat release, so I think it > makes sense to have webmin treat it as a redhat variant like versions > 7.3, 8 and 9. > > However, since they don't seem to be planning to call the next > official release 'redhat fedora 1.0' rather than 'redhat 10', webmin > should use that version number as well. Probably the best solution is > webmin's internal name for Fedora to remain as 'redhat-linux', but for > the version number to be 'fedora-1.0'. > > So the os_list.txt entry would be like : > > Redhat Linux Fedora 1.0 redhat-linux fedora-1.0 $etc_issue > =~ /fedora\s*core.*\s0\.94\s/i || `cat etc/redhat-release 2>&1` =~ > /fedora\s*core.*\s0\.94\s/ > > And config files would be named like config-redhat-linux-fedora-1.0, > and module.info os_support line entries (where needed) would be like > redhat-linux/fedora-1.0 . I don't see any need to treat the current > betas of fedora (like 0.94) any different from the actual 1.0 release, > as hopefully they will be totally compatible. > > Any chance you could modify your patch to use this naming scheme? > > - Jamie > > Dan Tucny wrote: > > 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 |
