Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 44756 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jun 2000 08:31:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 44739 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2000 08:31:25 -0000 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 01:33:03 -0700 From: Greg Stein To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: MPM modules vs "normal" modules (was: cvs commit: ...) Message-ID: <20000624013303.K29590@lyra.org> Mail-Followup-To: new-httpd@apache.org References: <20000618081356.A9972@manojk.users.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20000618081356.A9972@manojk.users.mindspring.com>; from manoj@io.com on Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 08:13:56AM -0400 X-URL: http://www.lyra.org/greg/ X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 08:13:56AM -0400, Manoj Kasichainula wrote: > On Sat, May 27, 2000 at 02:18:28PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: > > I think there should be. It isn't like MPMs need configuration merging. > > Seriously: what MPM is going to be hooking *ANY* of the request processing > > hooks? IMO, they shouldn't. Separating the types will clarify that. > > I won't necessarily agree or disagree with you on this point; I'll > just propose a scenario, which is suexec. > > suexec is a Unix only thing. It uses User and Group directives (soon > to be SuexecUser and SuexecGroup to lessen confusion). These need > merging. In addition, there will be data from request processing that > determines which user suexec decides on. One example is > . > > Now, how should this be done properly. The patch I sent out earlier > did this with a unix-only module called mod_suexec and a new > ap_create_privileged_process function that uses the suexec binary. The > hints from mod_userdir would be implemented using the notes table. > > However, I've been pondering the possibility that the proper place for > this is unixd, and that means the MPM would be doing this. This is > process management after all. What do you think? My impression was that MPMs handled accept processing. Other kinds of processing "should" go elsewhere. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/