Installing mod_perl when other things are required, too.
I couldn't find a faq on this one. I need to also install apache with php and mod_ssl. Those two require a simple ./configure --switch to enable them. I didn't see anything for mod_perl in the INSTALL, and it seemed there were a lot of manual things to be done, which made me think I wasn't reading it correctly. What's the magic incantation? TIA
Re: Installing mod_perl when other things are required, too.
On Sat, 22 Apr 2000, Forrest Aldrich wrote: I couldn't find a faq on this one. I need to also install apache with php and mod_ssl. Those two require a simple ./configure --switch to enable them. I didn't see anything for mod_perl in the INSTALL, and it seemed there were a lot of manual things to be done, which made me think I wasn't reading it correctly. What's the magic incantation? Install mod_perl first, making sure you enable mod_so. Then php should just install fine as a dso. I'm not sure about mod_ssl though - I think it has to patch the Apache source. I'm almost certain this is covered in one of the INSTALL.foo documents. -- Matt/ Fastnet Software Ltd. High Performance Web Specialists Providing mod_perl, XML, Sybase and Oracle solutions Email for training and consultancy availability. http://sergeant.org http://xml.sergeant.org
Re: Installing mod_perl when other things are required, too.
I need to also install apache with php and mod_ssl. Those two require a simple ./configure --switch to enable them. I didn't see anything for mod_perl in the INSTALL, and it seemed there were a lot of manual things to be done, which made me think I wasn't reading it correctly. What's the magic incantation? There isn't a magic incantation, and there is a lot of stuff that has to be done manually. Stas' mod_perl Guide is your friend: http://perl.apache.org/guide/install.html#Installation_Scenarios_for_mod_p You won't find something describing your exaction situation here, but this should give you a leg up. mod_php should have an option that allows it to be created as a (guess what) module to be added to the web server (rather than an integrated build procedure, like what mod_perl does with DO_HTTPD = 1). I expect that you could then treat that module similarly with how you take care of the modules as described with the URL above. However, you might find that throwing all 3 of those modules into Apache will create for you a bloated beast of a server. If conserving memory is at all important to you, then you should take a look at the recent thread that went on on this list, "[RFC] Do Not Run Everything on One mod_perl Server": http://forum.swarthmore.edu/epigone/modperl/floivonmel The concepts discussed here could help you manage your memory more effectively (though you'll have to come up with the implementation yourself). Cheers, Richard Richard Dice * Personal 514 816 9568 * Fax 514 816 9569 ShadNet Creator * http://shadnet.shad.ca/ * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Occasional Writer, HotWired * http://www.hotwired.com/webmonkey/ "squeeze the world 'til it's small enough to join us heel to toe" - jesus jones
RE: mod_perl-1.99_01-dev [ - possibly OT ]
I though the new apache model was a hybrid were there were preforked children that then used threads - have I missed the plot here ? Yes, you can configure any combination. See Erics mails on the "RE: mod_perl 2.x/perl 5.6.x ?" for a list of possible combinations. Gerald
RE: mod_perl 2.x/perl 5.6.x ?
So, does that still leave mod_perl serializing access until everything is rewritten to be thread-safe? No, mod_perl 2.0 assign a "full" Perl interpreter to every Apache thread. So the Perl modules itself need not to be thread safe. Perl 5.6 has some nice features to clone a Perl interpreter in a efficent way (syntax tree of modules (loaded before clone) is used by all cloned Perl interpreters, while the data is separate for all cloned Perl interpreters). mod_perl 2.0 get manages a pool of cloned Perl interpreters which is assigns as neccessary to the Apache threads. Gerald - Gerald Richterecos electronic communication services gmbh Internetconnect * Webserver/-design/-datenbanken * Consulting Post: Tulpenstrasse 5 D-55276 Dienheim b. Mainz E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice:+49 6133 925151 WWW:http://www.ecos.de Fax: +49 6133 925152 -
Re: Installing mod_perl when other things are required, too.
If you get the CVS version of mod_perl it has a INSTALL.simple.ssl file. If you pick up mod_ssl from Engelschall's site it comes with the same INSTALL.ssl file. Both files (which are identical) have build instructions for what you need near the bottom. However, just as a note, they aren't as clear if you want to do it DSO. It seems though, that all one need do is add USE_DSO=1 to the mod_perl stage and drop the APACI and APXS references. Then, when you get to making Apache, in addition to defining SSL_BASE and the vars for EAPI_MM and RSA_BASE, add the configure option for --enable-shared=all.
Re: Installing mod_perl when other things are required, too.
On Sun, Apr 23, 2000 at 11:03:01AM +0100, Matt Sergeant wrote: On Sat, 22 Apr 2000, Forrest Aldrich wrote: I couldn't find a faq on this one. I need to also install apache with php and mod_ssl. Those two require a simple ./configure --switch to enable them. I didn't see anything for mod_perl in the INSTALL, and it seemed there were a lot of manual things to be done, which made me think I wasn't reading it correctly. What's the magic incantation? Install mod_perl first, making sure you enable mod_so. Then php should just install fine as a dso. I'm not sure about mod_ssl though - I think it has to patch the Apache source. I'm almost certain this is covered in one of the INSTALL.foo documents. Just install the SSL patch first, and then do what Matt said and everything should work fine. I have a similar config over here. Thanks, Shane.
RE: mod_perl 2.x/perl 5.6.x ?
At 02:51 PM 4/23/00 +0200, Gerald Richter wrote: So, does that still leave mod_perl serializing access until everything is rewritten to be thread-safe? No, mod_perl 2.0 assign a "full" Perl interpreter to every Apache thread. So the Perl modules itself need not to be thread safe. Perl 5.6 has some nice features to clone a Perl interpreter in a efficent way (syntax tree of modules (loaded before clone) is used by all cloned Perl interpreters, while the data is separate for all cloned Perl interpreters). mod_perl 2.0 get manages a pool of cloned Perl interpreters which is assigns as neccessary to the Apache threads. In the end, there may still be some threading issues that should be watched out for I suspect. If mod_perl 2.0 follows a similar design to ActiveState's PerlEx, PerlEx also has some problems when the Perl modules themselves link to stuff that is not threadsafe as a shared library. eg, every 2 weeks or so, the PerlEx mailing list has someone post "I get mysterious crashes with Win32::ODBC"... and the perennial reply of "Don't use that module with PerlEx as it's not threadsafe"... I don't know if there is anything else that might cause a similar problem. Later, Gunther
Re: mod_perl-1.99_01-dev [ - possibly OT ]
- Original Message - From: "Gerald Richter" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Greg Cope" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 April 2000 13:46 Subject: RE: mod_perl-1.99_01-dev [ - possibly OT ] I though the new apache model was a hybrid were there were preforked children that then used threads - have I missed the plot here ? Yes, you can configure any combination. See Erics mails on the "RE: mod_perl 2.x/perl 5.6.x ?" for a list of possible combinations. Thanks Greg Gerald
RE: mod_perl 2.x/perl 5.6.x ?
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000, Gerald Richter wrote: So, does that still leave mod_perl serializing access until everything is rewritten to be thread-safe? No, mod_perl 2.0 assign a "full" Perl interpreter to every Apache thread. So the Perl modules itself need not to be thread safe. Perl 5.6 has some nice features to clone a Perl interpreter in a efficent way (syntax tree of modules (loaded before clone) is used by all cloned Perl interpreters, while the data is separate for all cloned Perl interpreters). mod_perl 2.0 get manages a pool of cloned Perl interpreters which is assigns as neccessary to the Apache threads. I suspect that two things are going to happen here. The CPAN community is going to have to turn the crank one more time to update popular modules to work under this environment. DBI and its drivers are going to be particularly important. Secondly, this Perl environment is going to reveal things that people never considered doing before, and some new and useful modules will be added to our arsenal. But first, Apache 2.0 will need to get out the door. -jwb
[OT] Lotus Domino as Web server ?
Hi dear modperlers, We have a client here willing to use Domino to serve his Web site. The site should not be very busy (we expect about 15000 hits per day), but is relatively complex, with database integration, visitors tracking, customers logins, SSL... As anyone on the list already used this strange beast ? What could I say to this client to make him change his mind, apart from obvious reasons (price, closed and proprietary solution, nobody uses it, less than 1% on the Internet). Thanks for any response. Jean-Denis Girard Essential Software
Re: [OT] Lotus Domino as Web server ?
I am just curious why they are fixated on Domino to start with? What are their concerns? On Sun, 23 Apr 2000, Jean-Denis Girard wrote: Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 08:36:45 -1000 From: Jean-Denis Girard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mod-perl Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OT] Lotus Domino as Web server ? Hi dear modperlers, We have a client here willing to use Domino to serve his Web site. The site should not be very busy (we expect about 15000 hits per day), but is relatively complex, with database integration, visitors tracking, customers logins, SSL... As anyone on the list already used this strange beast ? What could I say to this client to make him change his mind, apart from obvious reasons (price, closed and proprietary solution, nobody uses it, less than 1% on the Internet). Thanks for any response. Jean-Denis Girard Essential Software
Re: [OT] Lotus Domino as Web server ?
The usual reasons: I bet they use lotus notes internally for everything, and domino is the only choice for those companies that have chained themselves^h^h^h^h made a strategic decision to go notes. -Justin On Sun, Apr 23, 2000 at 02:24:20PM -0400, gnielson wrote: I am just curious why they are fixated on Domino to start with? What are their concerns? On Sun, 23 Apr 2000, Jean-Denis Girard wrote: Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 08:36:45 -1000 From: Jean-Denis Girard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mod-perl Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OT] Lotus Domino as Web server ? Hi dear modperlers, We have a client here willing to use Domino to serve his Web site. The site should not be very busy (we expect about 15000 hits per day), but is relatively complex, with database integration, visitors tracking, customers logins, SSL... As anyone on the list already used this strange beast ? What could I say to this client to make him change his mind, apart from obvious reasons (price, closed and proprietary solution, nobody uses it, less than 1% on the Internet). Thanks for any response. Jean-Denis Girard Essential Software -- Justin Beech --- http://www.dslreports.com Phone:212 269 7052 x252 : 212 706 9129 (home) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://dslreports.com/contacts
Re: [OT] Lotus Domino as Web server ?
Why do you need to settle on one or the other? Anyway, the only reason you need Domino IMHO is because you have linked in with other Lotus notes applications. However, if this is a public site not an intranet, I would strongly urge them not to use this short cut for putting apps out there. Lotus Notes apps are badly slapped together front ends on top of apps written on another computing paradigm (client server)... which don't mix well. However, if that argument is not being listened to, you can use the engineering tact. Sneak apache in there with mod_proxy and mod_rewrite and follow Stas' guide on having backend versus front end servers. Use apache on the front end (and an optional backend for mod_perl) and Lotus notes as a backend server. This has the advantage of allowing the domino server to scale better since it will only be hit for domino app-like things rather than images which can be cached by the front-end server. This includes security advantages in that Lotus Notes server, being so bloated with app code) is not something you might want directly exposed to the Internet. Anyway, I've been at two largish organizations in the last 4 years that wanted to switch away from Notes to the Web. One was early enough. The other was too late as their infrastructure was already dedicated to it and it was very hard to convert all the apps because the requirements that went into building the apps were organic and never written down-- so a web rewrite would have involved a lot of analysis. In the end, that company did switch off of Notes in a major way though but it was done in pockets and done very gradually over the course of a year -- and they still are not completely off of it. If Notes is used in an Intranet, I see no reason to rewrite everything for the web from scratch with today's shortage of IT personnel. And it will give the Notes developers the capability to start learning how a web server works so that they can slowly train themselves up on other technologies... One thing to understand, is a lot of the time notes admins are really secretaries, ex-mail administrators, etc... that also double as form builders and data entry clerks. So it isn't so easy or instant to convert these pseudo-IT people into web people with a point and click and installing an apache server. You don't want to piss these people off either. They are [a] close to the data and [b] usually close to the business that creates the data (and a business person can usually override an IT person in any organization). A lot of training and hand holding is required to get buy-in from these pseudo-IT people -- on the surface they are not powerful, but they do form a strong current. Later, Gunther At 08:36 AM 4/23/00 -1000, you wrote: Hi dear modperlers, We have a client here willing to use Domino to serve his Web site. The site should not be very busy (we expect about 15000 hits per day), but is relatively complex, with database integration, visitors tracking, customers logins, SSL... As anyone on the list already used this strange beast ? What could I say to this client to make him change his mind, apart from obvious reasons (price, closed and proprietary solution, nobody uses it, less than 1% on the Internet). Thanks for any response. Jean-Denis Girard Essential Software
RE: mod_perl 2.x/perl 5.6.x ?
At 09:59 AM 4/23/00 -0700, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: On Sun, 23 Apr 2000, Gerald Richter wrote: So, does that still leave mod_perl serializing access until everything is rewritten to be thread-safe? No, mod_perl 2.0 assign a "full" Perl interpreter to every Apache thread. So the Perl modules itself need not to be thread safe. Perl 5.6 has some nice features to clone a Perl interpreter in a efficent way (syntax tree of modules (loaded before clone) is used by all cloned Perl interpreters, while the data is separate for all cloned Perl interpreters). mod_perl 2.0 get manages a pool of cloned Perl interpreters which is assigns as neccessary to the Apache threads. I suspect that two things are going to happen here. The CPAN community is going to have to turn the crank one more time to update popular modules to work under this environment. DBI and its drivers are going to be particularly important. Secondly, this Perl environment is going to reveal things that people never considered doing before, and some new and useful modules will be added to our arsenal. I agree... but to some degree I hope this has been done for many of the major modules and the major DBI modules (eg DBD sybase)... as they ended up having to work on ActiveState's PerlEx which uses a similar model. In a way, PerlEx's model has been a test for mod_perl 2.0. Caveat to my statement: I am not a Perl internals guru. So what I say is conjecture and hope rather than what will definately happen when mod_perl 2.0 comes out. Later, Gunther
Re: vanilla install failure 1.3.12/1.22/5.6.0
Hope this helps...
GNU gdb 19991004
(gdb) httpd
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x806412e in perl_handler (r=0x8727d9c) at mod_perl.c:844
844 dPPREQ;
(gdb) bt
#0 0x806412e in perl_handler (r=0x8727d9c) at mod_perl.c:844
#1 0x8097e23 in ap_invoke_handler (r=0x8727d9c) at http_config.c:508
#2 0x80ab309 in process_request_internal (r=0x8727d9c) at http_request.c:1215
#3 0x80ab772 in ap_internal_redirect_handler (
new_uri=0x8727d7c "/perl/action.pl/LoadClass.pm", r=0x872704c)
at http_request.c:1351
#4 0x80909b1 in action_handler (r=0x872704c) at mod_actions.c:255
#5 0x8097e96 in ap_invoke_handler (r=0x872704c) at http_config.c:520
#6 0x80ab309 in process_request_internal (r=0x872704c) at http_request.c:1215
#7 0x80ab36c in ap_process_request (r=0x872704c) at http_request.c:1231
#8 0x80a2c4e in child_main (child_num_arg=0) at http_main.c:4177
#9 0x80a2ddc in make_child (s=0x818b404, slot=0, now=956521954)
at http_main.c:4281
#10 0x80a2f39 in startup_children (number_to_start=5) at http_main.c:4363
#11 0x80a3566 in standalone_main (argc=4, argv=0xbb94) at http_main.c:4651
#12 0x80a3cf3 in main (argc=4, argv=0xbb94) at http_main.c:4978
(gdb) print *r
$1 = {pool = 0x8727024, connection = 0x8726014, server = 0x818b404,
next = 0x0, prev = 0x872704c, main = 0x0,
the_request = 0x872773c "GET /LoadClass.pm HTTP/1.0", assbackwards = 0,
proxyreq = NOT_PROXY, header_only = 0, protocol = 0x8727794 "HTTP/1.0",
proto_num = 1000, hostname = 0x8727984 "localhost",
request_time = 956521956, status_line = 0x0, status = 200,
method = 0x872775c "GET", method_number = 0, allowed = 0, sent_bodyct = 0,
bytes_sent = 0, mtime = 0, chunked = 0, byterange = 0, boundary = 0x0,
range = 0x0, clength = 0, remaining = 0, read_length = 0, read_body = 0,
read_chunked = 0, expecting_100 = 0, headers_in = 0x87271a4,
headers_out = 0x8728084, err_headers_out = 0x872756c,
subprocess_env = 0x87280fc, notes = 0x87282a4, content_type = 0x0,
handler = 0x8508644 "perl-script", content_encoding = 0x0,
content_language = 0x0, content_languages = 0x0, vlist_validator = 0x0,
no_cache = 0, no_local_copy = 0,
unparsed_uri = 0x8727ef4 "/perl/action.pl/LoadClass.pm",
uri = 0x8727f14 "/perl/action.pl/LoadClass.pm",
filename = 0x87285e4 "/work/mod_perl-1.22/t/net/perl/action.pl",
path_info = 0x872861c "/LoadClass.pm", args = 0x0, finfo = {st_dev = 2053,
__pad1 = 0, st_ino = 3957, st_mode = 33261, st_nlink = 1, st_uid = 1000,
st_gid = 100, st_rdev = 0, __pad2 = 0, st_size = 17592186044530,
st_blksize = 8, st_blocks = 956521953, st_atime = 946518392,
__unused1 = 0, st_mtime = 956245011, __unused2 = 0, st_ctime = 0,
__unused3 = 0, __unused4 = 0, __unused5 = 0}, parsed_uri = {scheme = 0x0,
hostinfo = 0x0, user = 0x0, password = 0x0,
hostname = 0x8727f14 "/perl/action.pl/LoadClass.pm", port_str = 0x0,
path = 0x0, query = 0x0,
fragment = 0x1 Address 0x1 out of bounds, hostent = 0x8728a84,
port = 32564, is_initialized = 0, dns_looked_up = 1, dns_resolved = 0},
per_dir_config = 0x872891c, request_config = 0x7265702f,
htaccess = 0x63612f6c}
(gdb) print perl_module
$2 = {version = 19990320, minor_version = 7, module_index = 18,
name = 0x814fccf "mod_perl.c", dynamic_load_handle = 0x0, next = 0x8179960,
magic = 1095774515, init = 0x80632e4 perl_module_init,
create_dir_config = 0x8065da8 perl_create_dir_config,
merge_dir_config = 0x8065b8c perl_merge_dir_config,
create_server_config = 0x8065f44 perl_create_server_config,
merge_server_config = 0x8065e34 perl_merge_server_config,
cmds = 0x8178d64, handlers = 0x8178f2c, translate_handler = 0,
ap_check_user_id = 0, auth_checker = 0, access_checker = 0,
type_checker = 0, fixer_upper = 0, logger = 0, header_parser = 0,
child_init = 0x806441c perl_child_init, child_exit = 0,
post_read_request = 0}
(gdb) quit
The program is running. Exit anyway? (y or n)
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 10:58:56PM -0700, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, After much fast progress buiding a new machine, I'm stuck.
This is a vanilla RH6.2 box with almost nothing on it.. no
residue from RPM perl or httpd (deselected at machine blast time).
I've built perl 5.6.0 (all tested out ok), also built apache 1.3.12
both with and without Ben-SSL (all tested out ok).
The most basic Modperl 1.22 install attempt fails though: just with
a simple perl Makefile.PL and let it build vanilla httpd next door.
It builds a binary, and make test starts it, chucks a few requests
and it core dumps. The trace is below, followed at the end by
the perl -V output.
The segfault comes in the third test .. "GET LoadClass.pm", just
after it looks around for some .htaccess files
if you could build mod_perl with PERL_DEBUG=1, then in mod_perl-1.22 run:
% gdb ../apache-x.x.x/src/httpd
(gdb) httpd
