tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Kilbride" <j...@kilbride.com>
Subject Re: mod_jk advice
Date Fri, 13 Apr 2001 18:46:55 GMT
You don't have to compile all of Tomcat to build mod_jk. That's the point,
mod_jk can be built by itself in about 5 minutes -- without ant, jaxp, or
jsse. I haven't seen any posts where the binary Tomcat doesn't work on
Linux, but I've seen a lot where the binary mod_jk doesn't work. If you
built Tomcat from scratch just to get mod_jk to work, then congratulations,
you did good, but I think you went the long way around. That's part of the
problem we're trying to point out. You had a working version of Tomcat, but
problems with mod_jk -- and you went through more pain than necessary to get
it to work.

The kernel has nothing to do with the problems you were having.

--jeff

----- Original Message -----
From: "James" <james@webfocus.com>
To: <tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: mod_jk advice


> I also ran into the same thing two weeks ago.
>
> and don't give me it's easy with makefiles.
>
> Took me no time to figure how to get tomcat up and running on port
> 8080.  That was the easy part.   The hard part cam when trying to get
> things to work with Apache, that took 3 days and tons reading thru
> everything on what was needed to get the mod_jk.  I put my money it has to
> do with Linux's new kernel. I'm not an expert but I would say that is a
start.
>
> There are makefiles and then you have ant ( why I don't know the wheel had
> to be reinvented ) but it was and you have to have this to build tomcat.
>
> - Red Hat Linux release 7.0 (Guinness)
> -  Kernel 2.4.1 on a 2-processor i686
>   -- apache 1.3.19             (
>   -- jakarta-ant 1.3
>   -- jakarta-tomcat 3.2.1
>   -- jaxp 1.1
>   -- jsse 1.0.2
>
> Now that I have it up and running and working the way I want ( basic setup
> in my book ) I'm on to Vhosts and SSL.
>
> James
>
>
> At 09:27 AM 4/13/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >It would be nice if they published what version of Linux/Apache/Tomcat
the
> >available binary was compiled for. I think it's pretty confusing for new
> >users when you say "Hey, here's a binary", but they don't understand all
the
> >reasons why it won't work with their platform. It's such an easy process
to
> >compile your own -- especially with the Makefile's provided. Maybe they
> >should just get rid of the binary and distribute the mod_jk source with
> >every Tomcat distribution. Is that feasible?
> >
> >--jeff
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Tim O'Neil" <tim@xythos.com>
> >To: <tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> >Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 9:10 AM
> >Subject: Re: mod_jk advice
> >
> >
> > > At 07:53 PM 4/12/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> > > >I had major problems getting Tomcat 3.2.1 working with Apache 1.3.14,
so
> > > >I wanted to share my solution.
> > > >
> > > >(For linux users, possibly others)  Don't grab the mod_jk.so from the
> > > >web site.  Compile it yourself.  I spent three hours trying to get
> > > >things to work with the downloaded version, with no success.  No
error
> > > >messages were generated either.  As soon as I compiled it myself,
bingo,
> > > >everything worked fine.
> > > >
> > > >Now I'm off to continue the torture with mod_webapp.  Yaye.
> > > >
> > > >-Dan
> > >
> > > Dan is a somewhat good illustration of why you
> > > want to at least have the option of compiling
> > > things yourself, per yesterday's thread on that
> > > topic. I only say "...a somewhat good" example
> > > because we can't say for certain why he had to
> > > take the source route rather than the binary one.
> > >
>


Mime
View raw message