Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hyperreal.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA03396; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgate2.boeing.com (mailgate2.boeing.com [199.238.248.100]) by hyperreal.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA03355; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:29:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xch-hub-01.ca.boeing.com by mailgate2.boeing.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA21071; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:29:24 -0700 Received: by xch-hub-01.ca.boeing.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52) id <01BCA0B0.7EE6BB70@xch-hub-01.ca.boeing.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:29:16 -0700 Message-ID: From: "Pierce, Jonathan A" To: "'Brian Behlendorf'" , "'Alexei Kosut'" Cc: "'apache-bugdb@apache.org'" , "'dgaudet@apache.org'" , "'jonathan.a.pierce@boeing.com'" Subject: RE: general/908: Is there a plan to include support for Active Server Pages in the Apache server for NT? Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:29:15 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apache-bugdb-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Understandable about the undocumented calls. Are you working with anyone at Microsoft on interoperability? If this is a feature that you do plan to implement, I would be willing to clear up a dev machine for some test scenarios. Most of my work is ASP and ISAPI based, and I am a strong advocate of "platform diversity" in development, so your server interests me. >---------- >From: Alexei Kosut[SMTP:akosut@organic.com] >Sent: Friday, August 01, 1997 11:23 AM >To: Brian Behlendorf >Cc: apache-bugdb@apache.org; dgaudet@apache.org; >jonathan.a.pierce@boeing.com >Subject: Re: general/908: Is there a plan to include support for Active >Server Pages in the Apache server for NT? > >On Fri, 1 Aug 1997, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > >> At 03:00 AM 8/1/97 -0700, dgaudet@hyperreal.org wrote: >> >Some people have been looking at it. It is a desirable feature. >> >So it may be supported ... it depends on how easy it is to coax >> >certain programs to co-operate. >> >> We actually think it may be possible /today/ with the ISAPI module we've >> done for the NT port, since ASP is implemented as an ISAPI extension. In >> fact it might make a good test case for the ISAPI work we've done, >> discounting the possibility that the ASP engine relies on undocumented >> Microsoft calls :) >> >> Jonathan, if you'd like to download the NT port and give this a try, we'd >> love to hear if it works.... > >It doesn't. I've tried it. The ASP extension fails its initialization >call, probably because it tries to activate a MS-specific extension or >something, and is unable to. > >I haven't looked into it much, because it would probably involve tracing >through the execution of the ASP DLL, and that wouldn't be very >feasible. > >-- Alexei Kosut > >