[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20030124005010.GB5760@openwall.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:50:10 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: owl-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: RE : First install
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 12:40:05AM +0100, Estrade Matthieu wrote:
> I setup too my network card and did some stuff with. Sometimes, I get
> "neighbour overflow", I dunno what it is...
This sounds like a network driver problem, but with so little detail I
can't even grep kernel sources for it appropriately.
> Anyway, I am happy with this new system... which is very clean.
> I will now try to compile apache as you wrote in the TODO file.
> You are requiring apache 1.3.x so now 1.3.27 but why not 2.0 ?
Russian Apache is still based on 1.3.x (and I think that's for some
reasons not limited to the extra effort it'd take to update it). I
don't want to maintain two versions.
> 2.0 is more secure
Is it? (I don't care about its properties on Win32.)
> and really more powerfull than 1.3.x.
What specific features of 2.0 do you think would benefit Owl users?
> I will try to compile both.
--
/sd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
