Martin Kraemer wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 02:25:40PM -0500, Bill Stoddard wrote: > > ... > Indeed -- but then it's no longer CGI (different interface), so you > lose all the CGI applications. There has already been fcgi (in an attempt > at providing "almost" source level compatibility, and winning speed by > recycling processes instead of forking all the while).
By the way: The main problem of Apache 2.0 (IMHO) is not stability (which is already higher than competing products), or performance (although it still keeps improving), or portability (which is excellent), or security (well, comparing to IIS...); The main problem is that most of the complementing tools, such as the fcgi you mentioned (FastCGI), or the Apache's WBM of Webmin, or the various building/packaging tools (e.g. Apacompile), etc., are not yet working with Apache 2.0, but only with 1.3.*. This is, from my impression, the main reason that stops people to move to Apache 2.0. -- Eli Marmor [EMAIL PROTECTED] CTO, Founder Netmask (El-Mar) Internet Technologies Ltd. __________________________________________________________ Tel.: +972-9-766-1020 8 Yad-Harutzim St. Fax.: +972-9-766-1314 P.O.B. 7004 Mobile: +972-50-23-7338 Kfar-Saba 44641, Israel
