httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Fwd: [users@httpd] 2.3.15-beta: module proxy_balancer requires the not automatically loaded module slotmem_shm
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:01:17 GMT
Devs,

This one in from the users@ list.  It sounds vaguely familiar
to the issue previously mentioned about win32 defaults and some
strange dependency failure between proxy_balancer and slotmem
providers.

Only, this is on the bleeding edge beta posted today, and hits
Unix (particularly with our new cleaned-up default for #LoadModule).

Thanks for the report, Jens.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [users@httpd] 2.3.15-beta: module proxy_balancer requires the not automatically
loaded module slotmem_shm
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 16:25:38 +0100 (CET)
From: Schleusener, Jens <Jens.Schleusener@t-online.de>
To: users@httpd.apache.org

Hi,

sorry if I report a small problem to this list although 2.3.15 seems still
"beta" and I am not sure if it's not a "personal" problem:

I just downloaded and extracted the source packages
httpd-2.3.15-beta.tar.bz2 and httpd-2.3.15-beta-deps.tar.bz2 and issued
in the httpd-2.3.15-beta directory

 ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/www/httpd2.3.15-beta --enable-so \
  --disable-ldap --with-included-apr --with-pcre=/usr/local/soft \
  --enable-mods-shared="most cache mem-cache mime-magic proxy ssl unique_id"

and then a "make" and "make install" and tried to start the server
but without success. In the error_log I found

 [Wed Nov 09 16:19:47.001264 2011] [proxy_balancer:emerg] [pid 5581:tid 3076073744]
   ap_lookup_provider slotmem failed: is mod_slotmem_shm loaded??
  Configuration Failed

Ok, so I simply removed in the installed default httpd.conf the comment
sign within the line

 #LoadModule slotmem_shm_module modules/mod_slotmem_shm.so

and as expected now all works.

But if the used options above are valid ones so the according automatically
generated httpd.conf seems not correct per se (I didn't tested yet other
combinations of options in combination with the option "proxy").
Is that "normal" or an error of the configuration process (or of the
choosen configuration options)?

Regards

Jens

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
  "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org



Mime
View raw message