Rex Dieter wrote:
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> crossposting to java and packaging -
> Seems like we need an accepted standard for naming packages from
Sorry for the old followup, but I vaguely recall there been some old
badness about using the name "apache" (ie, notice the package named
'httpd' in the distro). I wonder if this is still a problem?
As I remember it, the Apache Software Foundation renamed their package
from "apache" to "httpd". They wanted to stress that
"Apache" was the
software foundation, and that the software foundation was more than
just a web server.
The packages in Red Hat Linux were renamed following this. Prior to
httpd 2.0 there were a number of inconsistencies in the rpms: the
package was called "apache", the modules lived in /var/log/apache and
the logrotate script was /etc/logrotate.d/apache, but the binary was
/usr/sbin/httpd, the configuration in /etc/httpd, the logs in
/var/log/httpd and the script to start it /etc/rc.d/init.d/httpd. We
wanted to standardize on one or the other, and since upstream didn't
like "apache" we settled on "httpd". It was purely a technical
Which is my very long winded way of saying I don't think using
"apache" in package names is a problem.