At 12:23 PM 2/27/2002, Jobarr wrote: > > > In that case we should simply make the error more descriptive: > > > > > > "Failed to load module. Perhaps this module was compiled for Apache >1.3?" > > > > Ugh. Then, +1 for Aaron's comment. > >A "Failed to load" message of any kind is MUCH better than "module not >found", as that leads to thinking that the FILE is not there as opposed to >just being invalid. I had that problem with a PHP module that was compiled >against a different build of Apache and wouldn't load. It took my a while to >realize that the problem was the file, not that Apache couldn't find the >file.
Dead on :) It's trivial to test for apr_file_stat() if the apr_dso_load() fails, so we can have two equally interesting and possibly even useful messages.
