[Bug 196591] Review Request: bitlbee
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Sep 4 17:45:44 UTC 2006
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: bitlbee
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196591
------- Additional Comments From redhat-bugzilla at linuxnetz.de 2006-09-04 13:45 EST -------
Why should I enable 'ntsysv' variant of bitlbee? When reading bitlbee.conf, I
think, I shouldn't do that (on the other hand: How to (re-)name two identical
services to avoid confusions in /usr/sbin/ntsysv?):
## Inetd -- Run from inetd (default)
## Daemon -- Run as a stand-alone daemon -- EXPERIMENTAL! BitlBee is not yet
## stable enough to serve lots of users from one process. Because of this
## and other reasons, the use of daemon-mode is *STRONGLY* discouraged,
## don't even *think* of reporting bugs when you use this.
I need "those perl calls" you mentioned in comment #14, to do a %makeinstall
rather a couple of "install -mXYZ" like you are doing. Finally it saves nothing,
so we could switch over when this makes you even more happy.
Hmm...xmlto really seems to be required no longer, it's just a hangover from
older times.
Regarding the proxy stuff, could it be a problem openssl vs. gnutls? Personally,
I would be happy if there's a technical reason to prefer openssl over gnutls ;-)
Ah, adding an own user for bitlbee is a very good idea!
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list