tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Kilbride" <>
Subject Re: mod_jk - DEAD END! [POSTSCRIPT]
Date Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:25:23 GMT
Forgive the expression, but bullshit. :)

The mod_jk compilation *is* trivial and since they don't list on the website
what version of Apache or Linux the binary is compiled for, it's pretty much
useless. I'd say the number one problem post I have seen since joining this
list relates to the fact that the binary doesn't work on most people's
systems. If you give somebody with relatively little experience a binary
that's supposed to work and it doesn't, it only confuses the matter that
much more.

By the way, I'd be interested in hearing what your config is, since it
worked for you.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rui M . Silva Seabra" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: mod_jk - DEAD END! [POSTSCRIPT]

> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:58:19PM +0100, Raj Subramani wrote:
> > Well folks it finally "appears" to work (after endless struggles and
> > news group and e-mail list browsing).
> >
> > Me thinks, there is absolutely no point in downloading the
> > binaries for LINUX (mod_jk.dll works a treat on NT first time every
> >
> > Build it!
> Bullshit. :)
> Forgive the expression, but it worked very well with me. Of course, if you
don't have similar enough a system with the one in which was
compiled, it will not work.
> Since windows is one platform with the same libraries, it's almost
deterministic the mod_jk.dll will work.
> There is a point in downloading. If it workds, fine, if it doesn't,
compile it.
> I've had problems because's compilation is non trivial. The
compiled one worked perfectly.
> Hugs, rms
> --
> + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
> + Whatever you do will be insignificant,
> | but it is very important that you do it -- Ghandi
> + So let's do it...?

View raw message