Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 06 Oct 1999, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > > I guess that the real problem is a DSO and all the required configuration.
> > > Why don't we roll a static mod_perl with apache: apache-mod_perl.rpm
> > > and let all the troubles go. Just install this rpm, fire the server and
> > > you are all set!
> >
> > Because most people's Apache's are a little more complex. (e.g. requiring
> > php or some other module). I suppose you could compile it in statically
> > _and_ allow DSO's, but then it's hard to nail down exactly what people want
> > (something I abhor about rpm's - there's no flexibility when you install
> > them).
>
> Matt, we aren't trying to take away the joy of mod_perl building :)
> the RPM woes were about newbies installing mod_perl, grabbing the
> book and getting their feet wet with mod_perl in a matter of seconds.
>
> An EVERYTHING=1 + static mod_perl would be perfect for 99.9% of new users.
>
> The people whose Apaches are a little more complex, know how to build
> mod_perl from the sources, don't we :)
Which reminds me of something I do here. Typically, when building the
bloated apache that sits behind squid or whatever, you need mod_perl,
php, mod_ssl and the rest. As you install each they typically crap
over each other's config.status files. So I save them after each step
and then build and squirrel away the loaded config.status file.
A trivial tip, but one that newbies might find useful. If Stas hasn't
already got it in his book ;-)
--
David Hodgkinson, Technical Director, Sift PLC http://www.sift.co.uk
Editor, "The Highway Star" http://www.deep-purple.com
Dave endorses Yanagisawa saxes, Apache, Perl, Linux, MySQL, emacs, gnus
