httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cristian Gafton <>
Subject Re: apache/linux modules
Date Mon, 02 Feb 1998 21:33:33 GMT
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> *everywhere* (i.e. never) we have to support the configuration file... and
> even if we could do dynamic loading everywhere, I wouldn't be using it on
> a performance critical server.

Wait a minute... WHY ?! Why can't you use the dynamic loadable modules on
a performance critical server ? It's the same thing as having apache
linked dynamically against libc... Are you saying that this will slow
things down ?

> We provide reasonable defaults in Configuration.  ./Configure from a
> freshly unpacked apache should provide a working program on most systems. 
> The exceptions are those that vary greatly from one distribution to
> another (i.e. linux)... and that I've tried to deal with in 1.3. 

Try to look at this from a distribution maintainer point of view. We'd
like to be able to ship aoache modules for Red Hat systems to include
postgres support, other cool stuff, without having to rebuild the apache
binary package every time... It is not only cool, buty it will make apache
easy to deploy on a lot of other cases (think about products like miniSQL,
mySQL, Solid server, etc, shipping their version of apache module and all
you have to do is to stick it into a directory and apache will start using

> have the issue of translating all of the apache architecture names to the
> equivalent autoconf names and then debugging the entire mess.  Not a small
> job.

Any volunteers ? :-) I am one.

Cristian Gafton   --   --   Red Hat Software, Inc.
 UNIX is user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.

View raw message