perl-modperl mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Ludwig <mil...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)
Date Fri, 09 Jul 2010 20:16:23 GMT
Perrin Harkins schrieb am 09.07.2010 um 13:19 (-0400):
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Michael Ludwig <milu71@gmx.de> wrote:

> > What's the status of using mod_perl on Windows?
> 
> http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/os/win32/install.html

Thanks. Doesn't sound too bad. So it's (1) ActiveState, (2) one of the
All-in-one packages mentioned, or (3) build your own. Or - as announced
by the originator of this thread - (4) Strawberry mod_perl.

I stumbled upon a blog post, which may or may not be relevant, or rather
like the domain name indicates:

The Rise and Fall of mod_perl
http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com/archives/1303

The title is badly chosen, as it doesn't deal with any rise or fall of
mod_perl, but only with the author's experiences of using mod_perl on
Windows. Could be summarized as follows:

* crashes and leaks running mod_perl on Windows (maybe just FUD, no
  indication it was specific to Windows)
* could be fixed
* desire to use Strawberry and CPAN instead of ActiveState and PPM
  (the former possibly being more convenient to use)
* no success building mod_perl against Strawberry (no need to do this
  any more now as Strawberry offers mod_perl binaries now)
* more crashes on mod_perl/Windows with a Catalyst app
* switch made from mod_perl to Pure Perl Server plus Apache/mod_proxy

Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?

-- 
Michael Ludwig

Mime
View raw message