From 4e59828f4c80f02684901daee7f69950cdcaa1c5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 10:10:26 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] response --- ...ment_1_37322058c38b946b773f43c8ea797272._comment | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/is_it_safe_to_enable_Servant_by_default__63__/comment_1_37322058c38b946b773f43c8ea797272._comment diff --git a/doc/forum/is_it_safe_to_enable_Servant_by_default__63__/comment_1_37322058c38b946b773f43c8ea797272._comment b/doc/forum/is_it_safe_to_enable_Servant_by_default__63__/comment_1_37322058c38b946b773f43c8ea797272._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d005eff0ef --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/is_it_safe_to_enable_Servant_by_default__63__/comment_1_37322058c38b946b773f43c8ea797272._comment @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 1""" + date="2024-10-17T14:07:02Z" + content=""" +Yes, it's safe to enable this build flag. It makes the `git-annex p2phttp` +command work, but users still have to choose to run that server. + +The only reason it's a build flag is that the version of servant needed is +not available in some old build environments. The flag actually should be +enabled by default when the necessary dependencies are installable +(in the case of a cabal build) or installed (in Debian's case). +"""]]