From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 10:20 AM
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 10:15:57AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > I thought we decided not to rely on -D SSL anymore, or am I mistaken? > > If that 'feature' is needed (and they don't know how to uncomment the > > LoadModule directive, or they are a static build) I suppose we could > > introduce the obverse, -D NOSSL, to let folks hobble along while they > > are fixing their config. > > Why not <IfModule mod_ssl.c>? Or, do we want them to explicitly > enable it by some action? Why not just have those lines commented > out in ssl-std.conf, but protected by <IfModule>? -- justin First, +1 on that syntax, irrespective of my next argument ;) I believe we have the Include ssl.conf already wrapped in an <IfModule > so that isn't an issue. OTOH, this doesn't work for static builds of mod_ssl.c, since the user can't unload modules from Apache 2.0 and re-add in the same way as 1.3 did. So we may wish to provide a mechansm for them to cripple ssl convenienly. From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 10:27 AM > Why would we want to remove -DSSL? It makes sense to me to force people > to enable SSL specially. I was under the impression we had decided so. I guess I'm mistaken, and on this entire issue, I'm agnostic. We have a means in Apache 2.0 to change the startup args, so to enable ssl, simply; apache -k config -n ApacheSSL -D SSL -d d:\serverroot -f conf\httpd.conf Really simple, actually. Bill
