tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roberto B." <robe...@ipermedianet.com>
Subject Re: mod_jk.so differences
Date Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:46:32 GMT
This is a perfect explanation.. thanks!!

R.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Labanowski" <jkl@osc.edu>
To: <tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 3:29 PM
Subject: RE: mod_jk.so differences


> It seems like you can either be correct or you have to make it easy for
> people who refuse to read the background information.
>
> "mod_jk-eapi.so" is for the EAPI (Extended Application Programming
Interface) of
> Apache. You USUALLY need the EAPI when you install mod_ssl module for
Apache.
> But you can have Apache EAPI without having mod_ssl installed/loaded.
> So, you can have the combinations:
>
>   Apache + EAPI + (no mod_ssl) + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
> and you can have the combination
>
>   Apache + EAPI + mod_ssl + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
>
>
> But you cannot have combination
>
>   Apache + (no EAPI) + mod_ssl + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
> or
>
>   Apache + (no EAPI) + mod_jk-eapi.so
>
>
> But you can have:
>
>   Apache + (no EAPI) + mod_jk-noeapi.so
>
> In other words, it is not if mod_ssl installed with Apache.
> It is if Apache was patched to use EAPI. So the mod_jk-eapi.so is a
correct
> name, and mod_jk-ssl.so is not, since mod_jk variant does not depend on
ssl
> presence in Apache.
>
> Jan
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
>
> > >How many times I have answered to that ?
> > >eapi is for apache compiled with mod_ssl
> > >noeapi for std apache
> >
> > so why not name mod_jk-eapi.so -> mod_jk-ssl.so?
> >
> > michael
> >
>
> Jan K. Labanowski            |    phone: 614-292-9279,  FAX: 614-292-7168
> Ohio Supercomputer Center    |    Internet: jkl@osc.edu
> 1224 Kinnear Rd,             |    http://www.ccl.net/chemistry.html
> Columbus, OH 43212-1163      |    http://www.osc.edu/
>


Mime
View raw message