On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 09:48:34AM +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
> Doug, do you plan to answer these concerns (see below) in 2.0? This kind
> of question pops up quite often and it's a legitimate one, to allow ISPs
> using mod_perl mainstream.
>
> So will it be possible to make pools of interpreters
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Jim Winstead wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 09:48:34AM +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
> > Doug, do you plan to answer these concerns (see below) in 2.0? This kind
> > of question pops up quite often and it's a legitimate one, to allow ISPs
> > using mod_perl mainstream.
> >
> >
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Robin Berjon wrote:
> At 09:48 01/03/2001 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
> >Doug, do you plan to answer these concerns (see below) in 2.0? This kind
> >of question pops up quite often and it's a legitimate one, to allow ISPs
> >using mod_perl mainstream.
> >
> >So will it be possib
At 09:48 01/03/2001 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Doug, do you plan to answer these concerns (see below) in 2.0? This kind
>of question pops up quite often and it's a legitimate one, to allow ISPs
>using mod_perl mainstream.
>
>So will it be possible to make pools of interpreters with different
>owne
Doug, do you plan to answer these concerns (see below) in 2.0? This kind
of question pops up quite often and it's a legitimate one, to allow ISPs
using mod_perl mainstream.
So will it be possible to make pools of interpreters with different
owners, running under different UID/GID? I can think of
The symbol hvrv2table is referenced by the latest libapreq as from CVS
today but not exported by modperl. Is this a private symbol or just not
exported by accident? The following patch adds it to the export file of
modperl so libapreq compiles again under AIX.
--
Jens-Uwe Mager
HELIOS Software G
