In a message dated 01-09-04 12:39:44 EDT, Guenter writes...
> > Guenter Knauf wrote...
>
> >> Hi,
> >> I was glad as Ian contributed his mod_gz; I tested it on Linux and Win32
> >> and it works for me.
> > What did you test?
> that it compiles, loads into server and compresses.
> > How 'heavily loaded' was the Server?
> you're right, I did only a quick test with some huge text pages; and I
didnt
> compare against your mod_gzip; but real comparing isnt possible yet because
> then I have to compare also Apache 1.3 with 2.0: I dont have your 2.0 gzip
> module.
I wasn't asking if you had tested mod_gzip... You said you had
tested 'mod_gz' and that 'it worked' and I was just curious what
you were calling 'success'. You don't even say what MIME
type you tested. text/plain or text/html? Did you try anything
else and did you try it under real circumstances like a fully
loaded Server?
[rest of message snipped]
Guenter... the rest of the message really should have been
sent to the mod_gzip forum. Check the title of this message
thread... it really concerns someone suggesting that a
filtering demo called 'mod_gz' be added to the Apache
base tarball. This is not really 'about' mod_gzip at all.
I WILL address every point you raised and I will check
my notes... I am SURE someone else found the answer
as to why Novell's version of Apache is not a standard
'distribution' of Apache and doesn't 'behave' the way
'normal' Apache does. I will locate the info and send it
to you. It may be that you have to get the patch from
Novell since it's only their 'altered' version of Apache
that isn't playing by the rules ( Actually... IBM's rewrite
falls into same category but that's not your concern ).
Please direct any further mod_gzip 'support' questions to
either the mod_gzip forum or to myself. mod_gzip is not
part of Apache and these guys are going to explode if
this 'please support my Netware' discussion goes any
farther on this forum under this message thread.
Yours...
Kevin Kiley
