[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hey > > Sorry - it took 30 mins to receive the confirmation (wasn't sure if it went > through successfully the 1st time)... > > Anyway, I don't have a BUG to report - all I want to know is, is it SAVE to > run non-LFS Apache with LFS Perl using mod_perl LFS. It works...sure...but > I'm not sure what the outcome will be if I deploy this solution into our > production environment. Intermittent Segmentation Faults?
Ah sorry then, I thought "I'm concerned about Segmentation Faults" meant that you had such.
You can rebuild Apache with:
CFLAGS="-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64". Assuming that you don't trip on any functions that Apache considers unsafe on your os with largefiles enabled. See Makefile.PL for more info.
The point is: You need to have both components to agree on sizeof() the vars they use. If they don't at best you will get immediate problem, at worst there will be subtle problems happening only in certain situations.
It may work OK, if you call only methods which use variables, whose sizeof() doesn't change when LARGE_FILES are enabled.
I know it's a big pain :( Same in mod_perl 2.0 and Apache 2.0. e.g. we have a problem with APR::PerlIO, and it seems that I've worked around it, by disabling "-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64" only for building this module, if perl was built with large files support.
Your safest bet is to have both components compiled with the same large file flags.
> Again...sorry for the 'impatience' but I need to make a decision today if > we're to go ahead with this solution...
Understood.
__________________________________________________________________ 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
