Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-13 Thread John Turner
My reasons:

- source has the fixes first...critical on production servers, 
especially for security fixes.  With source, you don't wait for Red Hat 
to release something.  A lag of several days can mean the difference 
between weathering a storm and spending the weekend scrolling through 
logs and compiling forensic evidence for lawyers.  The most recent 
OpenSSH fix is a perfect example of this...all of my Red Hat servers 
were patched by 9 AM the morning after the fix by building from 
source...it was several days before Red Hat got around to releasing the 
RPM for the same thing.

- source means you don't fight with everyone else in the world to 
download the RPM when RH releases it on the Red Hat network.  Many 
organizations have policies that prohibit installing RPMs from any other 
source...a corporate security officer would be nuts to let admins 
install RPMs with doubtful pedigrees.  Imagine someone setting up a "RPM 
mirror site" that has the RPM you need, only its their "special 
version".  How would you know?  Most people don't know how to check.

- source means you put the files where you want them to be.  Everyone 
has their own system, as does every company (or they should).  With 
RPMs, the files go where the RPM maintainer wants to put them...this may 
or may not fit your environment...it rarely does on my systems.  You can 
spend more time reconciling the differences (and dependencies) than you 
do just building from source.

- source means you know EXACTLY what was done to your system, you are 
not relying on someone else...this is key if you are sleeping next to a 
pager every night.

- source means you keep your installation tracking with the 
authoritative source.  I spent almost an hour explaining to an auditor 
why my Apache's version numbers didn't match Red Hat's...the auditor 
felt that RH's version number was the "safest" version number and that 
any later versions released by Apache.org were "beta".  His port scanner 
found a later version number and kicked out a red flag.  I don't have an 
hour to hold someone's hand. 

RPMs are great.  I use them for things I don't really want to spend the 
time to learn inside and out, like GNOME or whatever, typically 
desktop-level packages.  Package maintenance systems are necessary for 
any environment with a multitude of systems.  However, when it comes to 
publicly accessible web services (Apache, BIND, MTAs, etc), I build from 
source.  Its not right or wrong, its just right for me.  I think I got 
spoiled after administering a slew of *BSD systems for a couple of 
years...the ports tree is the shiznit.

John

Mike Millson wrote:

I have not had any problems integrating tomcat w/ RH9 and Apache 2. Here
is my write up on how to do this:
http://www.meritonlinesystems.com/docs/apache_tomcat_redhat.html

Granted, I'm not using mod_jk2, so maybe that is why I had no trouble. 

I have always heard it's better to compile Apache from source vs. using
the rpms, but no one has ever quantified the advantages to doing this.
Until someone does, and the advantages of compiling from source outweigh
the advantages I've listed below for using the rpms, I still recommend
using the rpms.
There must be advantages to compiling Apache from source. Anyone want to
be the advocate for this and explain why/when to compile from source?
Thank you,
Mike
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 12:09, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
 

Hi Mike !

I guess the best way to test my theory is to try integrating Tomcat with 
Apache 2 yourself. There are real benefits for using RH's rpms, but if 
the integration takes too much effort, it may not be worth it. I haven't 
touched Tomcat for about 4 months now, but when I was working on my 
document for integrating Tomcat and Apache way back in May, I remember 
having considerable trouble with RH9's Apache 2, which led me to use 
Falsehope's rpms instead.

Regards,
pascal chong
Mike Millson wrote:

   

There are two compelling benefits to installing the RedHat rpms:
1) Updates and bug fixes can be installed automatically from the Red Hat
Network (https://rhn.redhat.com/).
2) Startup and shutdown scripts are already configured and available.
I would like to weigh these benefits against any specific disadvantages
to using the RedHat rpms.
I know, this is a tomcat list, but I think it's relevant.

Thank you,
Mike
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 10:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 

I am using RH9 with the Apache2 that comes with it. Recently I've installed
Tomcat5 with mod_jk2 without too many problems (jakarta-tomcat-5.0.7.tar.gz and
mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm). Proper configuration of workers2.properties
and jk2.properties is essential I believe. I got a few sites running as virtual
hosts on Apache2 as well as on Tomcat5 and everything seems to be fine so far.
http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-5/v5.0.7-alpha/bin/
http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/rpms/
-> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connector

Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-06 Thread srevilak
mmillson> I have always heard it's better to compile Apache from
mmillson> source vs. using the rpms, but no one has ever quantified
mmillson> the advantages to doing this.  Until someone does, and the
mmillson> advantages of compiling from source outweigh the advantages
mmillson> I've listed below for using the rpms, I still recommend
mmillson> using the rpms.
mmillson>
mmillson> There must be advantages to compiling Apache from
mmillson> source. Anyone want to be the advocate for this and explain
mmillson> why/when to compile from source?

The most compelling reason to compile your own server is to
incorporate local source-level modifications.  Even if it's something
simple, like changing HARD_SERVER_LIMIT, or suexec settings.

Another reason would be to have more control over the installation
process.  Suppose you had an arrangement like this

  httpd -> apache-1.3.27
  apache-1.3.24/
  apache-1.3.26/
  apache-1.3.28/

Each versioned directory is a separate ServerRoot, and "httpd" is a
symbolic link to the currently active one.  To roll forward, repoint
the symlink, and restart the server.  To back out an upgrade, repoint
the symlink, and restart the server.  Changing the active version can
be done in a matter of seconds, and with very little disruption.

This sort of "symlink to active version" technique is common approach
for handling versioned installations, while maintaining a uniform path
for scripts, etc to use.  This isn't specific to apache; you can the
approach with any piece of softare: bind, sendmail, ant, tomcat,
emacs, java, or whatever.


dthomas> I would also like to know some facts on this. I need to
dthomas> maintain many Linux boxes running Apache and Tomcat...having
dthomas> the ability to update Apache with a plain RPM from RedHat is
dthomas> a huge bonus.

When you build an apache with the standard ("Apache") layout, the
--prefix directory contains an entire server installation.  The job
is then to put a copy of that directory tree on a each of the servers
that need it.  There are tools like rdist(1) that are designed
specifically for this purpose.  This isn't a bad write-up

  http://www.benedikt-stockebrand.de/rdist-intro.html

The second edition of the Unix Systems Adminstrators Handbook

  http://www.bookpool.com/.x/esf5tdpqim/sm/0130206016

had a chapter on file distribution.  Hopefully that chapter made it
into the third edition.  If so, it's also worth a read.


Given the choice of using an RPM vs. building your own, there are
advantages and disadvantages to either approach.  Ultimately, it's a
matter of weighing them out and determining what works best in your
particular situation.

-- 
Steve

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-05 Thread Dave Thomas
I would also like to know some facts on this. I need to maintain many 
Linux boxes running Apache and Tomcat...having the ability to update 
Apache with a plain RPM from RedHat is a huge bonus.

Thanks,
Dave Thomas
Mike Millson wrote:

I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that
comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing
this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the
downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?
Thank you,
Mike
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
 

Hi Dave,

Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
(http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.

Regards,
pascal chong
Dave Thomas wrote:

   

We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat
3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with
Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few
'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not
apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest
any docs or offer any info on this subject?
Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3?

Thanks for any info,
Dave Thomas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-05 Thread Mike Millson
I have not had any problems integrating tomcat w/ RH9 and Apache 2. Here
is my write up on how to do this:

http://www.meritonlinesystems.com/docs/apache_tomcat_redhat.html

Granted, I'm not using mod_jk2, so maybe that is why I had no trouble. 

I have always heard it's better to compile Apache from source vs. using
the rpms, but no one has ever quantified the advantages to doing this.
Until someone does, and the advantages of compiling from source outweigh
the advantages I've listed below for using the rpms, I still recommend
using the rpms.

There must be advantages to compiling Apache from source. Anyone want to
be the advocate for this and explain why/when to compile from source?

Thank you,
Mike

On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 12:09, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
> Hi Mike !
> 
> I guess the best way to test my theory is to try integrating Tomcat with 
> Apache 2 yourself. There are real benefits for using RH's rpms, but if 
> the integration takes too much effort, it may not be worth it. I haven't 
> touched Tomcat for about 4 months now, but when I was working on my 
> document for integrating Tomcat and Apache way back in May, I remember 
> having considerable trouble with RH9's Apache 2, which led me to use 
> Falsehope's rpms instead.
> 
> Regards,
> pascal chong
> 
> 
> Mike Millson wrote:
> 
> >There are two compelling benefits to installing the RedHat rpms:
> >1) Updates and bug fixes can be installed automatically from the Red Hat
> >Network (https://rhn.redhat.com/).
> >2) Startup and shutdown scripts are already configured and available.
> >
> >I would like to weigh these benefits against any specific disadvantages
> >to using the RedHat rpms.
> >
> >I know, this is a tomcat list, but I think it's relevant.
> >
> >Thank you,
> >Mike
> >
> >On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 10:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>I am using RH9 with the Apache2 that comes with it. Recently I've installed
> >>Tomcat5 with mod_jk2 without too many problems (jakarta-tomcat-5.0.7.tar.gz and
> >> mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm). Proper configuration of workers2.properties
> >>and jk2.properties is essential I believe. I got a few sites running as virtual
> >>hosts on Apache2 as well as on Tomcat5 and everything seems to be fine so far.
> >>
> >>http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-5/v5.0.7-alpha/bin/
> >>http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/rpms/
> >>-> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/doc/
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Bart
> >>
> >>Quoting Mike Millson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that
> >>>comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing
> >>>this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the
> >>>downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?
> >>>
> >>>Thank you,
> >>>Mike
> >>>
> >>>On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
> >>>  
> >>>
> Hi Dave,
> 
> Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
> reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
> Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
> (http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
> tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.
> 
> Regards,
> pascal chong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-05 Thread Chong Yu Meng
Hi Mike !

I guess the best way to test my theory is to try integrating Tomcat with 
Apache 2 yourself. There are real benefits for using RH's rpms, but if 
the integration takes too much effort, it may not be worth it. I haven't 
touched Tomcat for about 4 months now, but when I was working on my 
document for integrating Tomcat and Apache way back in May, I remember 
having considerable trouble with RH9's Apache 2, which led me to use 
Falsehope's rpms instead.

Regards,
pascal chong
Mike Millson wrote:

There are two compelling benefits to installing the RedHat rpms:
1) Updates and bug fixes can be installed automatically from the Red Hat
Network (https://rhn.redhat.com/).
2) Startup and shutdown scripts are already configured and available.
I would like to weigh these benefits against any specific disadvantages
to using the RedHat rpms.
I know, this is a tomcat list, but I think it's relevant.

Thank you,
Mike
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 10:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 

I am using RH9 with the Apache2 that comes with it. Recently I've installed
Tomcat5 with mod_jk2 without too many problems (jakarta-tomcat-5.0.7.tar.gz and
mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm). Proper configuration of workers2.properties
and jk2.properties is essential I believe. I got a few sites running as virtual
hosts on Apache2 as well as on Tomcat5 and everything seems to be fine so far.
http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-5/v5.0.7-alpha/bin/
http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/rpms/
-> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/doc/
Cheers,
Bart
Quoting Mike Millson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

   

I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that
comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing
this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the
downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?
Thank you,
Mike
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
 

Hi Dave,

Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
(http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.

Regards,
pascal chong
   



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-05 Thread Mike Millson
There are two compelling benefits to installing the RedHat rpms:
1) Updates and bug fixes can be installed automatically from the Red Hat
Network (https://rhn.redhat.com/).
2) Startup and shutdown scripts are already configured and available.

I would like to weigh these benefits against any specific disadvantages
to using the RedHat rpms.

I know, this is a tomcat list, but I think it's relevant.

Thank you,
Mike

On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 10:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am using RH9 with the Apache2 that comes with it. Recently I've installed
> Tomcat5 with mod_jk2 without too many problems (jakarta-tomcat-5.0.7.tar.gz and
>  mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm). Proper configuration of workers2.properties
> and jk2.properties is essential I believe. I got a few sites running as virtual
> hosts on Apache2 as well as on Tomcat5 and everything seems to be fine so far.
> 
> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-5/v5.0.7-alpha/bin/
> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/rpms/
> -> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/doc/
> 
> Cheers,
> Bart
> 
> Quoting Mike Millson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that
> > comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing
> > this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the
> > downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > Mike
> > 
> > On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
> > > Hi Dave,
> > > 
> > > Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
> > > reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
> > > Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
> > > (http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
> > > tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > pascal chong
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Dave Thomas wrote:
> > > 
> > > >We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat
> > > >3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with
> > > >Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few
> > > >'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not
> > > >apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest
> > > >any docs or offer any info on this subject?
> > > >
> > > >Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3?
> > > >
> > > >Thanks for any info,
> > > >Dave Thomas
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-
> > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> http://WWW.ADVENTUREFORUM.NET - Forum on World Travel and Adventure -
> 
> http://WWW.ADVENTUREFORUM.NET/worldfacts
> 
> http://WWW.ADVENTUREFORUM.NET/worldnews
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-05 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am using RH9 with the Apache2 that comes with it. Recently I've installed
Tomcat5 with mod_jk2 without too many problems (jakarta-tomcat-5.0.7.tar.gz and
 mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm). Proper configuration of workers2.properties
and jk2.properties is essential I believe. I got a few sites running as virtual
hosts on Apache2 as well as on Tomcat5 and everything seems to be fine so far.

http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-5/v5.0.7-alpha/bin/
http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/rpms/
-> http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk2/v2.0.1/doc/

Cheers,
Bart

Quoting Mike Millson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that
> comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing
> this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the
> downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?
> 
> Thank you,
> Mike
> 
> On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> > 
> > Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
> > reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
> > Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
> > (http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
> > tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > pascal chong
> > 
> > 
> > Dave Thomas wrote:
> > 
> > >We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat
> > >3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with
> > >Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few
> > >'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not
> > >apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest
> > >any docs or offer any info on this subject?
> > >
> > >Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3?
> > >
> > >Thanks for any info,
> > >Dave Thomas
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-
> > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 



http://WWW.ADVENTUREFORUM.NET - Forum on World Travel and Adventure -

http://WWW.ADVENTUREFORUM.NET/worldfacts 

http://WWW.ADVENTUREFORUM.NET/worldnews


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-05 Thread Mike Millson
I have heard the claims before about not using the default Apache that
comes w/ RH 9, but I have never seen any concrete evidence for not doing
this. Do you have any specifics such as articles or facts that show the
downside of using the default Apache that comes w/ RH?

Thank you,
Mike

On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:54, Chong Yu Meng wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> 
> Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
> reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
> Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
> (http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
> tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.
> 
> Regards,
> pascal chong
> 
> 
> Dave Thomas wrote:
> 
> >We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat
> >3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with
> >Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few
> >'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not
> >apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest
> >any docs or offer any info on this subject?
> >
> >Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3?
> >
> >Thanks for any info,
> >Dave Thomas
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >-
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-04 Thread Chong Yu Meng
Hi Dave,

Do NOT use the default Apache that comes with RH9 ! According to some 
reports, there are some serious bugs inside it. I'm using RH9, but my 
Apache comes from Falsehope.com 
(http://ftp.falsehope.com/home/gomez/apache2/). It takes a bit of 
tweaking, but you can get the Falsehope rpm to play nice with Tomcat.

Regards,
pascal chong
Dave Thomas wrote:

We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat
3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with
Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few
'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not
apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest
any docs or offer any info on this subject?
Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3?

Thanks for any info,
Dave Thomas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RH9's Apache 2 and Tomcat 4

2003-10-04 Thread Dave Thomas
We have an application that we have been suing Apache 1.3 with Tomcat
3.3 with for a while and I would like to test out using our app with
Tomcat 4 and RedHats default install of Apache 2. I have found a few
'how tos' on the subject but they all seem to be a bit dated and do not
apply to the current release of Tomcat and mod_jk2. Can anyone suggest
any docs or offer any info on this subject?

Also, how if the performance for Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3?

Thanks for any info,
Dave Thomas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]