Stas,
You had asked me to reply to the list with an answer to your question:
"BTW, can you please try 1.99_12. Do you have the same failures? Please reply
to that thread on the modperl list. And let's continue that discussion over there."
I have tried the following iterations, all producing the exact same "make test"
failures:
perl 5.8.3 downloaded from cpan (also tried 5.8.3 from sunfreeware.com)
mod_perl 1.99_12, mod_perl 1.99_13, and mod_perl 2.0 (latest dev release) all
downloaded from cpan
I'm going to try and focus on solaris, see if there is something that I can find with
my config. By the way, what OS is everyone else using to see these issues? I'm using
Solaris 2.8 rev 27.
Thanks,
Toby
-----Original Message-----
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 3/27/2004 1:45 PM
To: Joe Schaefer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [mp2] should we use mod_perl2.so instead of mod_perl.so?
Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>Issac Goldstand wrote:
>>
>>>I was gonna mention php - I don't remember exactly how they do, but
>>>it IS labelled php4.so (I think libphp4.so)
>>
>>It definitely won't be libperl4.so. We had this fun with mp1
>>already. So it'll be mod_perl2.so and you'd say:
>>
>>LoadModule perl_module modules/mod_perl2.so
>>
>>Does that sound right?
>
>
> I think so, but when you install over a prior version that had
>
> LoadModule perl_module modules/mod_perl.so
>
> what should the install process do? Conceivably it could
>
> 1) comment this line out, and leave the modules/mod_perl.so file
> intact, or
>
> 2) s/mod_perl/mod_perl2/ on this line, and remove the old
> modules/mod_perl.so file, or
>
> 3) leave conf/httpd.conf alone (assuming that's what it does now),
> and add a documentation note explaining that users with prior
> mp2 installs will need to adjust their LoadModule directive.
>
> I've been thinking about renaming apreq2's to mod_apreq2.so, so
> apreq2 will also need to DTRT here. FWIW, I'm leaning towards
> (2) in apreq2's case, but for mp2 I think (1) or (3) might be
> a better choice.
As Issaac wisely pointed out, we have absolutely no technical reason to
s/mod_perl.so/mod_perl2.so/, because we install it along with other Apache2
modules in $apache_root/modules which have no '2' extension. mod_apreq.so
seems to be in exactly the same boat.
To remind, mod_php has the numerical signifier, because it's possible to load
any and several of them for the same server, and that signifier doesn't
correspond to Apache generation but libphp library.
So as we probably not going to do the rename, the issues that you have
mentioned are moot, Joe ;)
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
