X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/blobdiff_plain/ad2f1805a9994440b68c6972b92a88a520ad98fc..f5466ad7173459bc9481781d8f54ba969f56a516:/doc/setup/discussion.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/setup/discussion.mdwn b/doc/setup/discussion.mdwn
index 0501f443a..2000c5dfb 100644
--- a/doc/setup/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/doc/setup/discussion.mdwn
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+I have copied over the ikiwiki.setup file from /usr/share/doc/ikiwiki/ to /etc/ikiwiki/ and run it after editing. My site gets built but when I click on the 'edit' button, firefox and google chrome download the cgi file instead of creating a way to edit it. The permissions on my ikiwiki.cgi script look like this: -rwsr-sr-x  1 root root 13359 2009-10-13 19:21 ikiwiki.cgi. Is there something I should do, i.e. change permissions, so I can get it to run correctly? (jeremiah)
+
+> Have a look [[here|tips/dot_cgi]]. --[[Jogo]]
+
 I just went through the standard procedure described for setup, copied the blog directory from examples into my source directory, ran ikiwiki, and everything seems to have worked, except that none of the 
 [[!meta ... ]] tags get converted. They simply show up in the html files unformatted, with no exclamation point, and with p tags around them. Any ideas? using ikiwiki version 2.40 on freebsd --mjg
 
@@ -238,3 +242,15 @@ Thank you! I'm not a Perl programmer, so what's your opinion: is this behavior a
 
 > That is not entirely clear to me from the documentation. It doesn't
 > say the path has to exist, but doesn't say it cannot either. --[[Joey]]
+
+I am experiencing the same problem "/etc/ikiwiki/custom: failed to set up the repository with ikiwiki-makerepo
+" on Debian squeeze with perl5.10.0. Upgrading to ikiwiki 3.10 fixes it. -- [Albert](http://www.docunext.com/)
+
+----
+
+Just a note, perl 5.10 isn't packaged as part of RHEL or thus CentOS nor EPEL,
+so it's not especially trivial to satisfy that requirement for ikiwiki on
+those platforms, without backporting it from Fedora or building from source.
+However, I have an ikiwiki 3.20100403 running on RHEL-4 supplied 5.8.8 without
+(seemingly too much) complaint.  How strong is the 5.10 requirement? what
+precicely breaks without it? -- [[Jon]]