ubuntu package providing `httpd` (like nginx, apache and lighttpd)

[andreasnuesslein]

I was wondering if it was possible to add a "provides: nginx" or something like this to the caddy ubuntu packages?

Some packages require something like this:

$ apt-cache depends zammad
zammad
  ...
  Depends: curl
    curl:i386
 |Depends: elasticsearch
  Depends: <elasticsearch-oss>
 |Depends: nginx
    nginx-core
    nginx-extras
    nginx-full
    nginx-light
  Depends: apache2
 |Depends: postgresql
  ...

obviously the better solution would be to ask zammad to add |Depends: caddy to that block, but a) they have like >400 open issues on github, so I think that'd take longer and b) there might be other packages out there that would need that update too.

cheers 👋

[hairyhenderson]

Caddy is neither nginx nor apache httpd, so why would this make sense? Is it usual for Ubuntu packages to claim they provide competing packages?

[andreasnuesslein]

@hairyhenderson Okay so I dug a bit deeper and actually:

apache2, nginx and lighttpd do a Provides: httpd, httpd-cgi, ..

apache2: Provides: httpd, httpd-cgi
nginx: Provides: httpd, httpd-cgi, nginx
lighttpd: Provides: httpd, httpd-cgi, lighttpd-mod-access, lighttpd-mod-accesslog, lighttpd-mod-ajp13, lighttpd-mod-alias, lighttpd-mod-auth, ...............

So I think it would be good if caddy could do the same and then I'd petition the zammad people (and any other packages I run into) to depend on httpd, not on nginx | apache2

Cheers

[carlwgeorge]

I'm not involved in the maintenance of the caddy deb package, but I agree with @hairyhenderson's comment that caddy is neither nginx nor httpd. That's really weird that Ubuntu does that, considering httpd is the literal name of the Apache project. I can see what they were going for but the implementation is bad. Fedora handles this by having all webserver packages provide the generic name "webserver", which other packages can depend on if they don't need to specify a particular webserver.

[root@f38-container:~]# repoquery --whatprovides webserver
Last metadata expiration check: 0:07:46 ago on Wed Nov 23 02:04:30 2022.
caddy-0:2.5.2-1.fc37.x86_64
httpd-0:2.4.54-6.fc38.x86_64
lighttpd-0:1.4.67-1.fc38.x86_64
nginx-1:1.22.1-1.fc38.x86_64

[andreasnuesslein]

Fedora handles this by having all webserver packages provide the generic name "webserver", which other packages can depend on if they don't need to specify a particular webserver.

I totally agree that many of the debian-packaging decisions are rather questionable. And I remember Gentoo having some waaay nicer foundations for their packages-logic. But still we live in a world where debian/ubuntu is quite predominant and I doubt that we can petition them to change their logic with this anytime soon :S

[francislavoie]

I'll close this, I don't think this particularly makes sense for us.

[endelwar]

Hi everyone,

Could we reopen this issue to consider adding Provides: httpd to Caddy's Debian package? Since httpd is a virtual package, this addition would improve compatibility with packages and scripts that depend on a generic HTTP server, allowing Caddy to serve as a drop-in alternative to Apache or Nginx in more contexts.

Including Provides: httpd would:

• Increase flexibility for system administrators choosing Caddy.
• Align with Debian packaging standards followed by other web servers.

Thanks for considering this; I think it could enhance Caddy's integration on Debian-based systems.

[francislavoie]

@endelwar you can easily add this yourself to your own systemd config with an override. See https://caddyserver.com/docs/running#overrides

Caddy does not, and should not, pretend to be Apache.

[endelwar]

@francislavoie editing the systemd config doesn’t inform apt that a web server is already available on the system and that installing another one is unnecessary. In the Debian ecosystem, httpd ≠ apache. httpd is actually a virtual package (Debian's httpd package), which allows apt to recognize that a compatible web server is installed.

By including Provides: httpd in Caddy's Debian package, it would prevent apt from automatically installing another web server (typically Apache2 on Debian) when a package declares a dependency on httpd. This change doesn’t make Caddy "pretend" to be Apache; rather, it allows Caddy to be recognized as a viable HTTP server option within the Debian package management system.

[francislavoie]

Oh sorry, got the apt config confused with systemd config, didn't re-read the whole thread this morning when this popped up on my phone, half awake.

I think our opinion still stands that Debian's approach is stupid, but whatever, should be simple enough: caddyserver/caddy#6691