httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>
Subject Re: Binary inconsistencies
Date Sat, 07 Jun 1997 18:03:54 GMT
On Sat, 7 Jun 1997, Paul Sutton wrote:

> I'm a bit confused about what modules should be built into the
> pre-compiled binaries. Some OSes have just the basic set, while others
> have many more modules (e.g. compare Linux with Irix 5.3).
> 
> Anyway, the point is that if binaries can have different modules
> configured for various reasons, this should be documented in binaries.html
> (I.e. how do we pick which modules to include in the binary). If I want to
> do a linux1 version (which is has a couple of conf.h differences to the
> linux2 currently available) which modules do I pick? Does it matter if
> linux1 binaries have different modules to linux2?

I tried to suggest a common set, but the idea wasn't really taken up...


> 
> This could make support in c.i.w.s.u difficult. Even if someone gives
> their OS and version for the binary they downloaded, I wouldn't know which
> modules are in that binary. So I'd like a reference document which lists
> which modules are available in each binary. Then at least we'd know if a
> "/server-status doesn't work" or "proxy doesn't work" error was due to a
> misconfiguration or a binary which does not include the relevant module. 

I don't know that a document is needed, but it could be documented that to
find out just do a ./httpd -l



Mime
View raw message