On Wed, May 05, 1999, Harry Zink wrote:
> While it is certainly entertaining to observe the bickerings of your two, on
> here, allow me a suggestion that will actually benefit those who need to use
> these tools, and are more interested in performance than politics:
>
> I am going to set up two identical boxes, and install either of your two
> solutions on them, and report back with my experience and findings. How's
> that?
Fine. Although from a performance point of view you'll not see much
differences, of course. It's more the functionality you've to compare IMHO.
For this an overview chart is useful...
> In order to do so, I will need the following (these are requirements):
>
> * Location of RPMs for either version, fit for use on a RH 5.2/6.0 system,
> in combination with Apache 1.3.6.
RPMs? No, please compile from scratch and both packages the same way, of
course.
> * Ability to install, co-exist, and work with mod_perl, mod_PHP3/PHP, and
> other modules (like mod_coldfusion, or mod_asp, etc).
A good issue.
> * If the above ability is not included by default, or simply supported by
> RPM install, please provide proper instructions on how to install your
> respective products to provide full DSO support.
All I've to say about this I've already written down in great detail in my
INSTALL document. For full DSO support you just need a simple
--enable-shared=ssl for mod_ssl and you should make sure OpenSSL was build
with "-fpic".
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl) www.modssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
