On 17/11/2013 3:30 p.m., Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
> On 17/11/13 04:17, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>> Instead of jumping to change the file name can we*try* to "ping" these
>>> >package distributors\maintainers and notify them that there is a
>>> meaning
>>> >to this file name?(2 pings and then drop the route...)?
>> I have been doing so every few months or so for the last ~5 years. Even
>> sending patches against their packaging. Some changed, some didn't.
>>
>> Amos
>>
> OK then!
> It's a strike two for them.
Yes unfortunately.
> I do not know exactly what they do think about the naming but it appears
> to me that if it was changed in at-least one major\big player then there
> is no need to change it.
At east one of the others is pointing Squid to load the OS provided
mime.table which maps a regexs of file prefix bytes to a content-type
and does not include the extra columns Squid is expecting (thus is loads
them as "").
I like your idea of moving the file contents into squid.conf proper.
Although I dont have any idea how widely it is altered by admin.
I will keep thinkign on it a bit before actually doing anything.
THank you everybody.
Amos
Received on Sun Nov 17 2013 - 03:11:08 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Nov 17 2013 - 12:00:09 MST