Post #88,216
3/13/03 11:21:18 PM
|
Have I just wasted my time? Debian newbie Qs
Well, I'm trying Debian on my server at home, which until now has run RH with Apache 2, Java 2, and qmail, among other things. "Woody", declared to be the "stable" Debian, didn't have any options for apache2 in dselect. So:
1) Am I correct in thinking that I need to move to the "unstable" version of Debian to implement apache2?
2) How do I find out if, for example, Java2 needs something more unstable than unstable?
3) I'm not going to get into qmail with Rick M around... :)
4) Can I move from stable to unstable without starting from scratch, now that I have a working Deb install?
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
|
Post #88,227
3/13/03 11:43:17 PM
|
Re: Have I just wasted my time? Debian newbie Qs
1) Possibly not; but testing is where it's at. Don't bother with unstable just yet. Change your sources.list to point to testing, do 'apt-get update', then 'apt-cache search apache' and see what turns up.
2) Java2 == Java 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4. There is no real Java 2. I believe that unstable has 1.4... I don't recall what testing has.
3) Bleah. Qmail. 'Nuff said. You're probably on your own because the licensing for qmail is wacky.
4) No issues. It's dead-stupid-simple. Modify your sources.list as above, 'apt-get update', then 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. Voila, you are now running testing. Again, don't bother with unstable yet.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #88,244
3/14/03 12:53:14 AM
|
Okay, good intel. Danke.
Looks like apache2-common 2.0.43-1 is in testing, and a slightly higher version in unstable. The question then becomes...are there any extra genuflections I need to go through to keep apache2 secure, since the Security Team won't? Or is the rule, "if it ain't in apt, proceed as normal"?
Re: Java. I meant 1.4.
So I think I'll go "testing", as long as that doesn't wreck anything else, which I don't believe it will. :)
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
|
Post #88,257
3/14/03 2:29:29 AM
|
Wuss.
Unstable's where the cool kids are.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #88,235
3/14/03 12:04:37 AM
|
Undoubtedly. The question is, have you...
...wasted it effectively. ObBinkley "I'll goof off more\r\nefficiently!" \r\n\r\n Apache 2 & unstable (or testing). Very likely. There's a package\r\nsearch utility at [link|http://www.debian.org/|www.debian.org]\r\nunder the "Packages" link. \r\n\r\n To show dependencies for a package: apt-cache show\r\npackagename. This includes most of the general information\r\nabout a package, including description, and dependencies. In general, a\r\npackage won't be available in testing/unstable/stable unless its\r\ndependencies are also present. One way of knowing you need to be\r\nelsewhere is if the package you want isn't available for\r\ninstallation. \r\n\r\n Don't get into qmail with me around either. Courier, Exim and\r\nPostfix are excellent, full-featured, fast, secure, and free\r\nsoftware MTAs. \r\n\r\n Once you've installed Debian, upgrading to a new target\r\nrelease is largely a matter of adding or substituting the\r\nappropriate sources to your /etc/apt/sources.list file.\r\nDowngrading is not trivial, however (ask Yendor ;-),\r\nthough it is possible, as well as educational. There are occasionally\r\ncurves, most are pretty well resolved. \r\n --\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
Keep software free. Oppose the CBDTPA. Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
|
Post #88,241
3/14/03 12:37:15 AM
|
Well, I wouldn't mind switching from qmail
..I am simply operating under the assumption that it's theoretically and/or statistically the most secure. If you can say, "Exim is just as secure," or convince me it's "secure enough", I don't have a problem switching.
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
|
Post #88,258
3/14/03 2:30:55 AM
|
Exim is plenty secure.
There's nothing intrinsically WRONG with qmail, it's just that the whole thing is on crack when you put it next to something like Exim.
And the licensing is insane, too.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #88,432
3/14/03 7:21:54 PM
|
Apache2 weirdness (missing some parts)
Okay, so I ... um... "up"graded to "testing"; used dselect to grab apache2-common and its dependencies, and installed.
Now, reading apache2 docs at apache.org, you start the server using a script called apachectl--the problem is, there is no apachectl script on my machine. So...where do I start looking for the pieces that dselect didn't install? Or is this abnormal behavior?
btw, yes, I just did an apt-get update and upgrade and even tried install apache2-common again, but it said "it's already the latest version".
:/
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
|
Post #88,433
3/14/03 7:30:26 PM
|
OK, I am an idiot.
But an idiot with a quick turnaround. :)
The file I *should* have been looking for was apache2ctl.
*Bonk*
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
|
