httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Kutschker <>
Subject Re: Direction was Re: mod_custom_log exits too late?
Date Mon, 16 Sep 2002 07:02:06 GMT
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 19:41:11 -0400 (EDT)

> Add to that, the threaded models of Apache 2.0 doesn't work with some
> of the most popular Apache 1.3 modules.

So the question would how can this be amended. Is there any way to help the module owners
to move on to a threaded module? BTW, there is also the problem that users must know what
modules are thread safe. I have the feeling that documentation is not enough. A kind of flag
set by the module authors indicating this might be a solution.

> If more modules would use the Apache build system to do builds, this
> problem wouldn't exist. We created the build system to allow modules
> to add their own config.m4 files. If you use CVS to checkout Apache
> 2.0, you can rely on CVS to merge the m4 files for you. This means
> that as a part of building the new version of Apache, your modules
> will also be built.

Is this documented somewhere? I have never used CVS checkous but tar files. Hate to day it,
but docs on 2.0 for module owners are... well, they certainly could be better.

> Rasmus is convinced that PerChild is the compelling reason, I am not as
> convinced as he is, but I am willing to consider it.

I think thta many ISPs that provide that provide some kind of access and/or custom CGIs will
use PerChild. AT least I would.

> What other compelling reasons do you see? Why should people
> upgrade? And, I would ask that you come at this from a users point of
> view, not a module authors point of view.

I liked the threading thing and the out-of-the-box ssl.


View raw message